    [House Report 106-222]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

    106th Congress                                                   Report
                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
     1st Session                                                    106-222

    ======================================================================

     DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL,
                                      2000

                                    _______

      July 2, 1999.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
                  State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                    _______

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

                                  R E P O R T

                                 together with

                                ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                            [To accompany H.R. 2466]

        The Committee on Appropriations submits the following
    report in explanation of the accompanying bill making
    appropriations for the Department of the Interior and Related
    Agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2000. The
    bill provides regular annual appropriations for the Department
    of the Interior (except the Bureau of Reclamation) and for
    other related agencies, including the Forest Service, the
    Department of Energy, the Indian Health Service, the
    Smithsonian Institution, and the National Foundation on the
    Arts and the Humanities.

                                    CONTENTS

    _______________________________________________________________________

                                                                Page number

                                                                Bill Report
    Department of the Interior:
            Bureau of Land Management..........................     2
                                                                         12
            U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.....................    10
                                                                         20
            National Park Service..............................    16
                                                                         30
            U.S. Geological Survey.............................    22
                                                                         50
            Minerals Management Service........................    25
                                                                         55
            Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and
                Enforcement....................................    27
                                                                         57
            Bureau of Indian Affairs...........................    30
                                                                         58
            Departmental Offices...............................    36
                                                                         64
            General Provisions.................................    44
                                                                         69
    Related Agencies:
            Forest Service, USDA...............................    56
                                                                         70
            Department of Energy...............................    68
                                                                         94
            Clean Coal Technology..............................    68
                                                                         94
            Fossil Energy Research and Development.............    69
                                                                         94
            Alternative Fuels Production.......................    69
                                                                         98
            Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves.............    70
                                                                         98
            Energy Conservation................................    70
                                                                         99
            Economic Regulation................................    71
                                                                        104
            Strategic Petroleum Reserve........................    71
                                                                        105
            Energy Information Administration..................    71
                                                                        105
    Indian Health Service, DHHS................................    74
                                                                        106
    Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation................    81
                                                                        113
    Institute of American Indian and Alaska Native Culture and
        Arts Development.......................................
                                                                        113
    Smithsonian Institution....................................    82
                                                                        114
    National Gallery of Art....................................    85
                                                                        116
    John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.............    86
                                                                        117
    Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars...........    87
                                                                        118
    National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities.........    87
                                                                        118
    Commission of Fine Arts....................................    90
                                                                        121
    Advisory Council on Historic Preservation..................    90
                                                                        122
    National Capital Planning Commission.......................    90
                                                                        122
    United States Holocaust Memorial Council...................    91
                                                                        123
    Presidio Trust.............................................    91
                                                                        123
    Title III--General Provisions..............................    92
                                                                        124

                       Comparison With Budget Resolution

        Section 308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional Budget and
    Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as
    amended, requires that the report accompanying a bill providing
    new budget authority contain a Statement detailing how the
    authority compares with the reports submitted under section 302
    of the Act for the most recently agreed to concurrent
    resolution on the budget for the fiscal year. This information
    follows:

                                                [In millions of dollars]
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Sec. 302(b)                 This bill--
                                                             -------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Discretionary   Mandatory   Discretionary   Mandatory
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Budget authority........................................        14,058            59        14,057            57
    Outlays.................................................        14,406            83        14,406            80
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              Summary of the Bill

        The Committee has conducted extensive hearings on the
    programs and projects provided for in the Interior and Related
    Agencies Appropriations bill for 2000. The hearings are
    contained in 11 published volumes totaling nearly 11,000 pages.
        During the course of the hearings, testimony was taken at
    23 hearings on 21 days from more than 500 witnesses, not only
    from agencies which come under the jurisdiction of the Interior
    Subcommittee, but also from Members of Congress, State and
    local government officials, and private citizens.
        The bill that is recommended for fiscal year 2000 has been
    developed after careful consideration of all the facts and
    details available to the Committee.

                                      BUDGET AUTHORITY RECOMMENDED IN BILL BY TITLE
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                     Committee bill
                            Activity                         Budget estimates,   Committee bill,     compared with
                                                              fiscal year 2000   fiscal year 2000   budget estimates
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Title I, Department of the Interior: New Budget             $7,768,930,000     $7,107,904,000      -$661,026,000
     (obligational) authority..............................
    Title II, related agencies: New Budget (obligational)        7,497,207,000      6,996,705,000       -500,502,000
     authority.............................................
                                                            --------------------------------------------------------
          Grand total, New Budget (obligational) authority.     15,266,137,000     14,104,609,000     -1,161,528,000
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      Total Appropriations for the Department of the Interior and Related
                                    Agencies

        In addition to the amounts in the accompanying bill, which
    are reflected in the table above, permanent legislation
    authorizes the continuation of certain government activities
    without consideration by the Congress during the annual
    appropriations process.
        Details of these activities are listed in tables at the end
    of this report. In fiscal year 1999, these activities are
    estimated to total $3,205,223,000. The estimate for fiscal year
    2000 is $2,817,736,000.
        The following table reflects the total budget
    (obligational) authority contained both in this bill and in
    permanent appropriations for fiscal years 1999 and 2000.

            DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES TOTAL BUDGET AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEARS 1999-2000
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              Item                            Fiscal year 1999   Fiscal year 2000        Change
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Interior and related agencies appropriations bill......    $14,297,803,000    $14,104,609,000      -$193,194,000
    Permanent appropriations, Federal funds................      2,262,702,000      2,242,275,000        -20,427,000
    Permanent appropriations, trust funds..................        942,521,000        575,461,000       -367,060,000
                                                            --------------------------------------------------------
          Total budget authority...........................     17,503,026,000     16,922,345,000       -580,681,000
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     Revenue Generated by Agencies in Bill

        The following tabulation indicates total new obligational
    authority to date for fiscal years 1998 and 1999, and the
    amount recommended in the bill for fiscal year 2000. It
    compares receipts generated by activities in this bill on an
    actual basis for fiscal year 1998 and on an estimated basis for
    fiscal years 1999 and 2000. The programs in this bill are
    estimated to generate $6.3 billion in revenues for the Federal
    Government in fiscal year 2000. Therefore, the expenditures in
    this bill will contribute to economic stability rather than
    inflation.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Fiscal year--
                              Item                          --------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    1998               1999               2000
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    New obligational authority.............................    $14,109,493,000    $14,297,803,000    $14,104,609,000
    Receipts:
        Department of the Interior.........................      7,786,883,000      7,645,151,000      5,643,179,000
        Forest Service.....................................        688,853,000        724,797,000        667,737,000
        Naval Petroleum Reserves...........................        178,254,000          4,774,000          4,489,000
                                                            --------------------------------------------------------
          Total receipts...................................      8,653,990,000      8,374,722,000      6,315,405,000
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       Application of General Reductions

        The level at which sequestration reductions shall be taken
    pursuant to the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control
    Act of 1985, if such reductions are required in fiscal year
    2000, is defined by the Committee as follows:
        As provided for by section 256(l)(2) of Public Law 99-177,
    as amended, and for the purpose of a Presidential Order issued
    pursuant to section 254 of said Act, the term ``program,
    project, and activity'' for items under the jurisdiction of the
    Appropriations Subcommittees on the Department of the Interior
    and Related Agencies of the House of Representatives and the
    Senate is defined as (1) any item specifically identified in
    tables or written material set forth in the Interior and
    Related Agencies Appropriations Act, or accompanying committee
    reports or the conference report and accompanying joint
    explanatory Statement of the managers of the committee of
    conference; (2) any Government-owned or Government-operated
    facility; and (3) management units, such as National parks,
    National forests, fish hatcheries, wildlife refuges, research
    units, regional, State and other administrative units and the
    like, for which funds are provided in fiscal year 2000.
        The Committee emphasizes that any item for which a specific
    dollar amount is mentioned in any accompanying report,
    including all increases over the budget estimate approved by
    the Committee, shall be subject to a percentage reduction no
    greater or less than the percentage reduction applied to all
    domestic discretionary accounts.

                        Land and Water Conservation Fund

        Following is a comparison of the Land and Water
    Conservation Fund by agency. More specific information can be
    found in each agency's land acquisition account.

                                            LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND
                                                [In thousands of dollars]
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Enacted fiscal    Estimated fiscal
                                                                 year 1999          year 2000         Recommended
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Assistance to States:
        Matching grants....................................                  0                  0                  0
        Administrative expenses............................               $500             $1,000               $500
                                                            --------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, assistance to States...................                500              1,000                500
                                                            ========================================================
    Federal programs:
        Bureau of Land Management..........................             14,600             48,900             20,000
        Fish and Wildlife Service..........................             48,024             73,632             42,000
        National Park Service..............................            147,425            171,468            101,500
        Forest Service.....................................            117,918            118,000              1,000
                                                            --------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, Federal programs.......................            327,967            412,000            164,500
                                                            ========================================================
          Total LWCF.......................................            328,467            413,000            165,000
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Committee has included $165,000,000 to cover the land
    acquisition needs of the Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Fish
    and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, and the Forest
    Service.

                                Indian Programs

        Spending for Indian services by the Federal Government in
    total is included in the following table:

                                           FEDERAL FUNDING OF INDIAN PROGRAMS
                                                [In thousands of dollars]
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                        Fiscal year
                            Budget authority                            Fiscal year     Fiscal year    2000, budget
                                                                       1998, actual    1999, enacted     estimate
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Department of Agriculture.......................................        $168,032        $170,990        $178,359
    Department of Commerce..........................................           4,606           4,606           5,256
    Department of Defense...........................................          16,000          16,000          16,000
    Department of Justice...........................................         119,065         186,760         221,949
    Department of Education.........................................       1,386,000       1,529,000       1,524,900
    Department of HHS...............................................       2,385,144       2,570,164       2,791,933
    Department of HUD...............................................         672,000         693,000         693,000
    Department of Veterans Affairs..................................             515             515             520
    Department of the Interior......................................       1,993,146       2,007,184       2,232,210
    Department of Labor.............................................          84,655          88,655          78,829
    Department of Transportation....................................         228,091         252,584         250,071
    Environmental Protection Agency.................................         139,136         173,884         167,434
    Small Business Administration...................................               0               0           1,000
    Smithsonian Institution.........................................          49,000          41,000          54,000
    Army Corps of Engineers.........................................          22,939          20,050          19,796
    Other Independent Agencies......................................          21,850          20,158          21,250
                                                                     -----------------------------------------------
          Total.....................................................       7,290,179       7,774,550       8,256,507
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                            Constitutional Authority

        Clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the House of Representatives
    states that:
        Each report of a committee on a bill or joint resolution of
    a public character, shall include a statement citing the
    specific powers granted to the Congress in the Constitution to
    enact the law proposed by the bill or joint resolution.
        The Committee on Appropriations bases its authority to
    report this legislation from Clause 7 of Section 9 of Article I
    of the Constitution of the United States of America which
    states: ``No money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in
    consequence of Appropriations made by law. . . .''
        Appropriations contained in this Act are made pursuant to
    this specific power granted by the Constitution.

      Committee Recommendations Compared With the Administration's Budget
                                    Request

        The Committee has carefully examined the needs of the many
    agencies covered by this bill in the context of the budget
    allocation. Unfortunately, the Administration ignored the
    budget agreement in submitting its fiscal year 2000 budget
    request. For the Interior bill alone, the request exceeded the
    fiscal year 1999 allocation by $1 billion. The Administration
    proposed to fund much of this increase by spending money we
    don't have--namely, tax increases that are not in law and not
    even under serious consideration. The Administration has not
    submitted legislative proposals that would yield the additional
    revenues that it proposes to spend in the fiscal year 2000
    budget request.
        Lands Legacy.--The Committee has not included funding
    requested in support of the Administration's proposed new $1
    billion ``Lands Legacy'' program. The proposal is troubling for
    several reasons. Most of these funds would not benefit Federal
    agencies. They involve the direct pass through of funds to
    States, cities and private entities. The Federal land
    management agencies, by the Administration's own estimate, have
    a backlog of maintenance needs totaling $15,000,000,000. Also,
    the Committee notes that forty-nine of the States had budget
    surpluses in fiscal year 1998, many of them quite large, and
    all States project a surplus in fiscal year 1999.
        In the National Park Service, the Committee does not agree
    with the additional $200,000,000 and sixty new FTEs for State
    land and water grants and new community assistance. The
    Committee questions the judgment of the Administration in
    making this recommendation at a time when the National Park
    Service suffers from serious backlog maintenance needs and
    operational shortfalls. At a time when the parks are being
    cited for OHSA and State health violations for facilities that
    are old and failing, it seems rather shortsighted to hire an
    additional sixty FTEs whose function is to disperse hundreds of
    millions in taxpayer dollars to the States. The Committee
    acknowledges that the Stateside grants are authorized under the
    Land and Water Conservation Act and that it may be appropriate
    at some time in the future, when the Federal lands and
    facilities are in better repair, to provide funding which
    focuses attention on critical land purchases for outdoor public
    recreation at State and local levels. However, the Committee
    continues to be concerned by the reluctance of the States and
    other supporters of the program to eliminate certain uses of
    these funds, such as public marinas, swimming pools and golf
    courses, which should not be financed with Federal funds.
        Likewise, the large increases proposed in the Fish and
    Wildlife Service for the Lands Legacy program have not been
    approved. In particular, the Committee is concerned that the
    Administration proposed to increase the Cooperative Endangered
    Species Conservation Fund from $14,000,000 in fiscal year 1999
    to $80,000,000 in fiscal year 2000. This increase would be
    derived from the Land and Water Conservation Fund rather than
    the Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund. The
    Committee neither endorses this dual funding mechanism nor such
    a large increase in funding without more substantial
    justification. The Committee has asked the General Accounting
    Office to examine the land acquisition programs within the
    Service and believes strongly that any substantial increases in
    those programs should not be made before the GAO review has
    been completed.
        The Lands Legacy request for the Forest Service follows a
    similar pattern: large increases for grants to States and other
    entities that have little relationship to the core Federal
    investments or responsibilities of the Forest Service. The
    Committee has not funded the Administration request to transfer
    $10,000,000 of stewardship incentives funding to the USDA for
    rural cooperative loans: such requests should be made directly
    to the appropriations subcommittee responsible for that agency,
    not the Interior Subcommittee. Similarly, the massive increase,
    in excess of 600 per cent, requested for the forest legacy
    program is not as high a priority as the huge backlogs in
    deferred maintenance, shortfalls in basic habitat, watershed
    and forest restoration funding, and the great needs for
    recreation and wildfire management support in direct service to
    the American public. The Committee also has not provided the
    requested funding of $118,000,000 for new land acquisition
    given the great needs mentioned above and the fact that
    unallocated acquisition funds are still available from last
    year.
        Department of Energy.--The Administration focuses much of
    its proposed budget increase on the Department of Energy
    programs in this bill, including global warming/climate change
    programs. The Committee believes that the Department of Energy
    needs to focus and streamline its programs and to work with the
    States and industry in doing so. More programs need to be
    eliminated or consolidated so that the research we do conduct
    yields timely and meaningful results. The Department of
    Energy's attitude toward research has been that almost
    everything that has been done in the past should be continued
    or expanded, and funding for new research programs should be
    added on top of that. This attitude is continued in the fiscal
    year 2000 budget request for energy conservation. The
    Department of Energy needs to do a better job of leveraging
    State and private industry money for the most essential
    research needs.
        Endangered Species Act.--Finally, the Administration
    requested large increases for Endangered Species Act programs.
    The Committee believes the Administration should submit a
    legislative proposal for reauthorizing that Act. The proposal
    should address needed reforms in ESA.

                      South Florida Restoration Initiative

        The Congress, and specifically this subcommittee, became
    involved and committed to the South Florida Restoration
    Initiative because the Administration assured us that the main
    goal was to restore the natural hydrological functions to
    Everglades National Park and other natural areas in southern
    Florida. This effort must include a guaranteed water supply
    including appropriate timing and distribution of water flow as
    well as significant improvements to water quality.
        The Congress has appropriated over $1 billion over the last
    five years demonstrating its commitment to the Administration's
    stated goal. Yet, a disturbing fact, raised by both the
    scientific and environmental communities involved in this
    effort, is that there is no true environmental restoration in
    the current plan because there is no guaranteed water supply.
        At several oversight hearings this year all of the major
    parties including the Department of the Interior, the Army
    Corps of Engineers and the Florida Water Management Districts
    all stated for the record that the project, when completed,
    will make available significant new and sustained water supply
    to the natural areas. We hope they are right, but whenever this
    Committee has attempted to get these parties to provide
    specific information that can be codified in permanent law we
    are given excuses for why it can't be done.
        The Committee understands that there are other factors at
    work here. There are competing interests, specifically the
    agriculture industry (including the largest sugar corporations
    in the country) and major development interests. Florida is one
    of the fastest growing states in the nation. These interests
    want to ensure a balanced approach that includes the concerns
    of their own industries, and the Committee understands this
    fact. However, the Committee is deeply concerned about the
    apparent lack of interest on the part of the Secretary of the
    Interior to ensure that his responsibilities, which are to
    protect the Federal parks, refuges and species which come under
    this jurisdiction, receive adequate protection. The Department
    seems confused and conflicted between its role of chief
    coordinator of this initiative and of protector of Federal
    lands and the environment.
        This Committee has asked the Secretary of the Interior for
    the past four years at public hearings to respond to the
    question: ``Aren't you concerned that when this project is
    complete, the Army Corps of Engineers and the Florida Water
    Management Districts will control the water supply and not the
    U.S. Department of the Interior?'' In an artful way, the
    Secretary has acknowledged that this is indeed a concern. He
    also agrees, when pushed, that the lack of guaranteed water
    supply, which will ensure true environmental restoration, is a
    concern. The Committee is still waiting for the Administration
    to present proposed solutions to these two serious problems to
    this Committee. The Committee has recommended bill language
    under the National Park Service land acquisition account that
    makes funding for land acquisition for South Florida subject to
    these conditions.
        The Committee understands that this is a partnership and
    that concessions have to be made, but it is unreasonable to
    expect those who are dedicated to the full and complete
    restoration of the natural systems in South Florida to continue
    to devote limited resources to a $10 billion plus initiative
    which fails to provide essential assurances that this essential
    goal will be met.

                      Backlog Maintenance and Improvements

        In its fiscal year 2000 recommendations for the various
    programs in the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations
    bill, the Committee has continued its emphasis on ``taking care
    of what we have in the public trust''. The budget submitted by
    the Administration focused on new and expanded programs and did
    not adequately address maintenance and operational shortfalls
    in many cases. The Committee understands that new initiatives
    and new land acquisition and construction projects make for
    ``good press'', and most of these proposals are worthy of
    consideration. However, in a constrained budget climate,
    funding for day-to-day operations and maintenance requirements
    must take higher precedence.
        The Committee has held oversight hearings on the
    maintenance backlog and construction programs in the land
    management agencies over the past two years. Participants at
    those hearings included officials from the General Accounting
    Office (GAO), the Inspectors General (IG) of the Departments of
    the Interior and Agriculture, the Bureau of Land Management,
    the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Park
    Service, and the Forest Service. Those hearings demonstrated
    that none of the land management agencies had an adequate
    program for categorizing and addressing maintenance and
    construction needs. The GAO and IG officials all testified that
    the maintenance backlog lists lacked credibility and, in some
    cases, were totally unacceptable. Neither the National Park
    Service nor the Forest Service were able to demonstrate that
    they had any definitive idea of what their backlog maintenance
    needs were. The systems in use did not have standardized
    definitions of what constitutes backlog and what constitutes
    routine maintenance. Nor did they have acceptable methodologies
    for establishing priorities or estimating costs. The National
    Park Service system included major construction and land
    acquisition projects in the maintenance backlog.
        Some improvements have been made, but the Committee expects
    the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture and the four
    land management agencies to demonstrate continued improvements
    in this area in fiscal year 2000. They also should attempt to
    standardize definitions and approaches across agencies to the
    maximum extent practicable. This is an issue that cries out for
    management attention at the highest levels of the Departments
    and the agencies. The Committee will continue to monitor
    progress in this area and expects to see accurate, clear,
    complete and consistent explanations of needs in the fiscal
    year 2001 budget submissions. The Departments of the Interior
    and Agriculture need to demonstrate that they are spending the
    taxpayers' dollars wisely and that they are exercising
    appropriate fiscal constraint in carrying out programs for, and
    financed by, the American public.

            Federal Land Highway Program Funding Support to Agencies

        The Committee is aware of the vast needs of the land
    management agencies under its jurisdiction. The Committee has
    placed strong emphasis on managing these resources and has
    consistently provided significant increases for backlog and
    other maintenance needs. The Committee notes that, in addition
    to the major increases provided by the Committee in this bill,
    the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century provides
    over $4 billion in additional funds for road construction and
    repair in the National Parks, Wildlife Refuges, Indian
    Reservations, and other public lands through the year 2003.

                     Recreational Fee Demonstration Program

        The Committee continues to monitor closely the Recreational
    Fee Demonstration Program authorized in fiscal year 1996 and
    now fully operational. The Committee is pleased with the
    progress to date and the improving trend of agency performance
    and inter-agency collaboration. This pilot program has made a
    major impact on the ability of the National Park Service to
    tackle backlog maintenance needs, and it is beginning to show
    good results for the other agencies in many locations. The
    Committee remains committed to using fee demonstration program
    funds, in addition to continued annual appropriations, for
    backlog maintenance and other special needs. The Committee
    remains enthusiastic about experimentation with new approaches,
    especially the entrepreneurship displayed by the Forest
    Service. The demonstration projects have not all been
    successful, but we are learning that public acceptance of
    individual projects changes over time. In general, the public
    seems willing to pay fees when they know, and see, the on-the-
    ground results at the site where the fees are collected. In
    addition to addressing deferred maintenance items, we are
    seeing substantial reductions in vandalism, increased public
    safety, wildfire reduction, and enhanced visitor experiences
    through a variety of visitor services that are now possible.
    The Committee encourages the agencies to increase interagency
    projects and to develop additional mechanisms to make the fee
    collection more ``seamless'' to the public.
        Each of the four agencies has had a slightly different
    experience. The program has had greatest fiscal impact on the
    National Park Service because of the preexisting infrastructure
    and design of park units for fee collecting. The National Park
    Service collected $136.8 million from 100 projects in fiscal
    year 1998 and anticipates revenue collections of $135 million
    during fiscal year 1999. Many deferred maintenance projects
    have already been accomplished, and major parks have a
    reasonable expectation that they may finally be able to catch
    up with unmet needs accumulated over decades. The Forest
    Service has 72 fee demonstration projects. During fiscal year
    1998, the Forest Service collected $20.8 million; fiscal year
    1999 collections are expected to be $24.5 million. The fact
    that the collecting unit retains the majority of the funds
    collected is the single largest selling point with the public.
    Public acceptance also has improved as visible improvements are
    made with fee dollars, and the public is becoming accustomed to
    paying for quality experiences on the National Forests and
    Grasslands. Fee dollars are being focused on long-term backlog
    maintenance problems and local enhancements, such as improved
    toilets, increased safety and fire patrols, interpretation, and
    road, trail, and campsite maintenance. The Bureau of Land
    Management approved 68 projects and collected fees of $3.5
    million during fiscal year 1998. In fiscal year 1999, BLM
    expects to collect $6 million. The BLM is primarily allocating
    these additional funds to high priority backlog-maintenance
    needs. The principal lesson learned to date by the BLM is to
    work with local communities and users when determining the
    kinds of services desired and the corresponding fee charged.
    The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service collected $3.1 million from
    77 projects in fiscal year 1998. These funds have been used to
    address a variety of backlog maintenance and one-time
    operational needs such as improving trail guides and visitor
    facilities. In fiscal year 1999 the Service estimates
    collections totaling $4 million at 100 participating units.

                  Allocating Congressional Funding Priorities

        The Committee is concerned that the agencies funded by this
    Act are not following a standard methodology for allocating
    appropriated funds to the field where Congressional funding
    priorities are concerned. When Congressional instructions are
    provided, the Committee expects these instructions to be
    closely monitored and followed. In the future, the Committee
    directs that earmarks for Congressional funding priorities be
    first allocated to the receiving units, and then all remaining
    funds should be allocated to the field based on established
    procedures. Field units or programs should not have their
    allocations reduced because of earmarks for Congressional
    priorities without direction from or advance approval of the
    Committee.

                         Recreation on the Public Lands

        Public participation in recreation programs funded in this
    bill is an important and growing aspect of the land management
    agencies under the jurisdiction of this Committee. These
    agencies are responsible for the National Parks managed by the
    National Park Service, the National Wildlife Refuge System
    managed by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the
    Nation's public lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management,
    and our National Forests and Grasslands managed by the Forest
    Service. It is a little known fact that recreation in the
    National Forests exceeds that of the National Parks. The Forest
    Service manages 192 million acres, has over 850 million
    visitors a year, and attracts 125 thousand volunteers. By
    contrast the National Park Service manages 83 million acres,
    has about 288 million visitors, and attracts 112 thousand
    volunteers. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service manages 94
    million acres, has 30 million visitors annually and attracts 31
    thousand volunteers. The Bureau of Land Management has the
    largest land base of the land management agencies with 264
    million acres. BLM has about 65 million visitors annually and
    attracts 17 thousand volunteers. The Committee continues to
    place a high priority on maintaining these recreation programs,
    ensuring that the American public has safe and uplifting
    experiences on the Nation's public lands. The Committee is
    grateful to all the volunteers who are helping to make the
    public lands better places for the visiting public and for
    generations to come.

                           Women and Minority Hiring

        The Committee continues to support equal employment hiring
    practices in all the agencies covered by this bill. The
    Committee included sizable increases in the Department of the
    Interior budget several years ago to encourage greater
    sensitivity to the need for a diverse workforce. Those funds
    have remained in the base budget ever since. The Committee is
    concerned about the Department of the Interior's request for
    additional funds in fiscal year 2000 for ``diversity
    initiatives''. The Committee reminds the Department that the
    law prohibits discrimination and additional funding should not
    be required to enforce that law. The Committee is concerned
    that, too often, the emphasis on hiring minorities and women is
    placed on the equal employment opportunity, civil rights, and
    other administrative offices and not on other program offices.
    The Committee expects the Department to ensure that diversity
    extends to all offices and, just as program offices should be
    sensitive to hiring qualified women and minorities at all
    levels of program operations and management, administrative
    offices should also implement a balanced staffing strategy.
    Qualifications and demonstrated ability should always be the
    determining factors for any position. Management training
    should stress EEO responsibilities and every manager should be
    held accountable for complying with EEO policies. This should
    be an integral part of agency operations and not the subject of
    special initiatives.

                      TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

                           Bureau of Land Management

        The Bureau of Land Management is responsible for the
    multiple use management, protection, and development of a full
    range of natural resources, including minerals, timber,
    rangeland, fish and wildlife habitat, and wilderness on about
    264 million acres of the Nation's public lands and for
    management of 300 million additional acres of Federally-owned
    subsurface mineral rights. The Bureau is the second largest
    supplier of public outdoor recreation in the Western United
    States, with an estimated 65 million visits totaling 570
    million visitor hours of recreation use on the public lands
    under the Bureau's management.
        Under the multiple-use and ecosystem management concept the
    Bureau administers the grazing of approximately 4.3 million
    head of livestock on some 164 million acres of public land
    ranges, and manages over 43,000 wild horses and burros, some
    264 million acres of wildlife habitat, and over 150,000 miles
    of fisheries habitat. Grazing receipts are estimated to be
    about $14.2 million in fiscal year 2000, compared to an
    estimated $14.3 million in fiscal year 1999 and actual receipts
    of $15 million in fiscal year 1998. The Bureau also administers
    about 4 million acres of commercial forest lands through the
    ``Management of lands and resources'' and ``Oregon and
    California grant lands'' appropriations. Timber receipts
    (including salvage) are estimated to be $80.4 million in fiscal
    year 2000 compared to estimated receipts of $65.8 million in
    fiscal year 1999 and actual receipts of $86.5 million in fiscal
    year 1998. The Bureau has an active program of soil and
    watershed management on 172 million acres in the lower 48
    States and 92 million acres in Alaska. Practices such as
    revegetation, protective fencing, and water developments are
    designed to conserve, enhance, and develop public land, soil,
    and watershed resources. The Bureau is also responsible for
    fire protection on the public lands and on all Department of
    the Interior managed lands in Alaska, and for the suppression
    of wildfires on the public lands in Alaska and the western
    States.

                       management of lands and resources

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $612,511,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................       641,100,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................       632,068,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................       +19,557,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -9,032,000

        The Committee recommends $632,068,000 for management of
    lands and resources, an increase of $19,557,000 from the fiscal
    year 1999 enacted level and a decrease of $9,032,000 from the
    budget request. As a result of significant budgetary
    constraints arising from the balanced budget agreements,
    limited funding has been provided to address the Bureau's
    uncontrollable cost increases so as to provide the same level
    of service to the public as that provided during fiscal year
    1999. In addition to uncontrollable cost increases, the
    Committee has provided limited funding increases for priority
    programs, especially where the Bureau is required to expend
    additional resources as a result of litigation as is the case
    with grazing permits, or threatened and endangered species
    programs, or where the Bureau is required to undertake new or
    expanded activities, which is the case with the acquisition of
    the Headwaters forest. Within the recommended amount the
    Committee has provided $2,500,000 to the National Fish and
    Wildlife Foundation to leverage funding with non-Federal
    partners for innovative on-the-ground projects for wildlife and
    fisheries, watershed, and other activities affecting bureau
    lands. The Committee has also clarified the Foundation's bill
    language. The Committee also approves the Bureau's request to
    change its budget structure and establish separate
    subactivities for annual and deferred maintenance.
        It is the understanding of the Committee that the Bureau is
    reviewing the completeness and depth of the information in its
    land use planning and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
    review documents. This review is the result of a growing
    concern on the part of the Bureau's managers that many land use
    plans do not currently reflect new or revised legal mandates
    and resource conditions such as revised air and water quality
    standards, endangered species listings, and critical watershed
    designations. These documents, along with the mandated NEPA
    reviews, are used by the Bureau to evaluate and authorize a
    variety of land and resource allocation decisions related to
    commercial, recreation, conservation, and land health
    activities. Recently several of the Bureau's decisions relating
    to these types of activities have been challenged in the
    courts, often resulting in delays in authorizing resource
    management actions, growing backlogs in use authorizations, and
    growing costs.
        The Committee expects the Bureau to submit as part of its
    fiscal year 2001 budget request the results of its ongoing
    analysis and review into the required level of land use
    planning and NEPA review actions the Bureau will have to
    undertake in order to correct identified deficiencies in these
    areas. The Committee also expects the Bureau to include in its
    request the level of funds and other resources that would be
    required to address these problem areas.
        The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the
    budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

        Land resources.--The Committee recommends $155,500,000 for
    land resources, a decrease of $5,880,000 from the budget
    request and an increase of $10,586,000 above the 1999 level,
    including increases above the 1999 level of $4,137,000 for
    fixed costs, $1,829,000 for standards and guidelines,
    $2,000,000 to address the growing problem of invasive plants on
    public lands, $1,000,000 to address management issues for the
    new Headwaters forest acquisition, $1,000,000 for the San Pedro
    Partnership, $600,000 for the joint BLM and National Park
    Service problems associated with the removal of burros from
    National Park Service lands in the California desert, and
    $20,000 for a cooperative BLM and tribal cultural survey.
        Within the funds provided for soil, water, and air
    management, $1,000,000 is provided for the San Pedro
    Partnership initiative in Cochise County, Arizona. This
    represents an increase of Bureau resources dedicated to this
    high priority initiative. This area represents the most
    extensive riparian ecosystem remaining in the desert southwest
    with the highest bird diversity of any place of its size in the
    country. The Committee fully supports this multi-year
    cooperative effort to maintain and restore these valuable and
    ecologically significant lands.
        The Committee is concerned that a grazing program for the
    Ft. Stanton Area of Critical Environmental Concern has not
    begun. This land has been historically grazed and for years
    long-term grazing research was conducted on many of the
    pastures. The Committee requests a report from the Bureau on
    its intentions for this land, including an explanation as to
    why a grazing program cannot be conducted under the Taylor
    Grazing Act. Further, the report should address the prospect of
    using the land for additional wildlife and grazing research.
        The Committee requests a report from the Bureau regarding
    the Organ Mountains located near Las Cruces, New Mexico. The
    report, due by May 1, 2000, should provide data for resources,
    land ownership, and issues and conflicts that pertain to
    current and future management of the Organ Mountains and
    related Federal lands from the Texas border to the northern
    border of Dona Ana County.
        The Committee understands that the Tohono O'odham tribe has
    a strong interest in the area of Boboquivara Peak and Mountain
    for cultural and religious reasons, and would like to see these
    lands removed from the National Wilderness Preservation System
    and placed into trust status. The Committee encourages the
    tribe to work with the Bureau of Land Management and the Bureau
    of Indian Affairs to look at alternative land management
    options. In the interim, the Committee has provided the Bureau
    with an additional $20,000 to conduct a cultural survey of
    Boboquivara Peak and the eastern portion of the mountain. The
    remaining cost of this survey is to be provided by the tribe.
        Wildlife and fisheries.--The Committee recommends
    $34,638,000 for wildlife and fisheries, a decrease of $50,000
    below the budget request and an increase of $2,875,000 above
    the 1999 level, including increases above the 1999 level of
    $875,000 for fixed costs, $1,000,000 for cost share programs
    through the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, $500,000 for
    wildlife management, and $500,000 for fisheries management.
        The Committee has provided an additional $1,000,000 to the
    National Fish and Wildlife Foundation for cost-share projects
    benefiting the conservation of Bureau lands. The Committee has
    also included bill language clarifying that funding for the
    Foundation is to be advanced in a lump sum and that these funds
    be available for the highest priority projects that benefit
    wildlife, fisheries, soil and water, forest, rangeland or other
    public land resources.
        Threatened and endangered species.--The Committee
    recommends $18,903,000 for threatened and endangered species,
    an increase of $50,000 above the budget request and an increase
    of $1,484,000 above the 1999 level, including increases above
    the 1999 level of $484,000 for fixed costs, and $1,000,000 to
    address the growing backlog of consultations the Bureau must
    undertake under the Endangered Species Act.
        Recreation management.--The Committee recommends
    $51,403,000 for recreation management, a decrease of $350,000
    below the budget request and an increase of $1,328,000 above
    the 1999 level for fixed costs.
        Energy and minerals.--The Committee recommends $76,427,000
    for energy and minerals including Alaska minerals. This is an
    increase of $2,050,000 above the budget request and an increase
    of $3,391,000 above the 1999 level, including increases above
    the 1999 level of $1,891,000 for fixed costs, and $2,500,000 to
    address the growing backlog of coalbed methane permits, and a
    decrease of $1,000,000 for Alaska minerals.
        The Committee has provided an additional $2,500,000 for the
    processing of permits for coalbed methane activities. The
    Committee has included bill language under this account that
    makes the use of these funds contingent upon a written
    agreement between the coal mine operator and the gas producer
    prior to permit issuance if the permitted activity is in an
    area where there is a conflict between coal mining operations
    and coalbed methane production.
        Realty and ownership management.--The Committee recommends
    $73,107,000 for realty and ownership management, a decrease of
    $2,000,000 below the budget request and a decrease of $475,000
    below the 1999 level, including an increase above the 1999
    level of $1,925,000 for fixed costs, and a decrease of
    $2,400,000 for Alaska conveyance.
        Resource protection and maintenance.--The Committee
    recommends $33,795,000 for resource protection and maintenance,
    a decrease of $300,000 from the budget request and a decrease
    of $40,893,000 below the 1999 level, including an increase
    above the 1999 level of $865,000 for fixed costs, and a
    transfer of $41,758,000 as a result in shifting maintenance
    funding to the new transportation and facilities maintenance
    activity as proposed by the Bureau.
        Transportation and facilities maintenance.--The Committee
    recommends $46,304,000 for transportation and facilities
    maintenance, a decrease of $2,552,000 below the budget request
    and an increase of $46,304,000 above the 1999 level, including
    increases of $1,098,000 for fixed costs, $1,000,000 for annual
    maintenance, $2,448,000 for backlog maintenance, and a transfer
    of $41,758,000 into this new activity.
        Because the Committee places such a high priority on
    Federal agencies maintaining their infrastructure, the
    Department of the Interior and the bureaus have begun to focus
    their attention on addressing the serious problems associated
    with the growing backlog of maintenance projects. To address
    this issue the Committee has agreed to establish this new
    budget activity, and even though the Committee once again is
    faced with declining budgetary resources it has provided an
    increase that will allow the Bureau to continue to address its
    backlog maintenance needs.
        Land and resource information systems.--The Committee
    recommends $19,130,000 for land resource information systems,
    the same as the budget request and a decrease of $8,786,000
    below the 1999 level.
        Mining law administration.--The Committee recommends
    $33,529,000 for mining law administration. This activity is
    supported by offsetting fees equal to the amount made
    available.
        Workforce and organizational support.--The Committee
    recommends $122,861,000 for workforce and organizational
    support, the same as the budget request and an increase of
    $3,743,000 above the 1999 level for fixed costs.
        The Committee once again commends the Bureau's efforts to
    leverage its funds with non-Federal partners through its
    challenge cost share (CCS) program. The Committee concurs with
    BLM's current policy of not using CCS funds for purposes other
    than establishing joint activities with tribal, State, and
    private partners. Because each Federal dollar available for
    cost sharing results in two or more dollars available for on-
    the-ground activities, the Committee directs that a cap of 10
    percent be placed on allowable BLM internal charges against CCS
    funds. As a result, at least 90 percent of the funds
    appropriated for CCS shall be available for matching
    partnerships at the field level.
        In order to enhance land management and research efforts,
    the Committee encourages the Bureau of Land Management to work
    with experts from Weber State University, who have experience
    and expressed interest in the development of computer-based
    remote sensing and GIS land management systems for the BLM.

                            wildland fire management

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $286,895,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................       305,850,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................       292,399,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................        +5,504,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................       -13,451,000

        The Committee recommends an appropriation of $292,399,000
    for wildland fire management, which is an increase of
    $5,504,000 from the 1999 level and a decrease of $13,451,000
    from the budget request.
        The appropriation includes $162,399,000 for preparedness
    and fire use, including an increase above the 1999 level of
    $5,550,000 for fixed costs. The Committee has provided
    $130,000,000 for suppression activities. The Committee's
    recommendation funds Interior at approximately 79 percent of
    the Most Efficient Level for preparedness. Within the funds
    provided for wildland fire management $9,300,000 is available
    for renovation or construction of fire facilities.

                        central hazardous materials fund

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $10,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        11,350,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        10,000,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -1,350,000

        The Central Hazardous Materials Fund was established to
    include funding for remedial investigations/feasibility studies
    and cleanup of hazardous waste sites for which the Department
    of the Interior is liable pursuant to the Comprehensive
    Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act and
    includes sums recovered from or paid by a party as
    reimbursement for remedial action or response activities.
        The Committee recommends $10,000,000 for the central
    hazardous materials fund, which is the same as the 1999 level
    and $1,350,000 below the budget request.

                                  construction

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $10,997,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................         8,350,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        11,100,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................          +103,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................        +2,750,000

        The Committee recommends $11,100,000 for construction,
    which is an increase of $103,000 above the 1999 level and
    $2,750,000 above the budget request.
        The Committee has provided increases to the budget request
    that include $2,500,000 to initiate the final phase of
    construction for the National Historic Trails Interpretive
    Center in Casper, Wyoming. The total cost to the Federal
    government of this project is $5,000,000 with the State and
    local government contributing any remaining costs. The
    Committee has also provided $50,000 for Trona Pinnacles, CA,
    and $200,000 for Amboy Crater, CA.

                           payments in lieu of taxes

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $125,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................       125,000,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................       125,000,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) provides for payments to
    local units of government containing certain Federally owned
    lands. These payments are designed to supplement other Federal
    land receipt sharing payments local governments may be
    receiving. Payments received may be used by the recipients for
    any governmental purpose.
        The Committee recommends $125,000,000 for PILT, the same as
    the budget request and the 1999 level.

                                land acquisition

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $14,600,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        48,900,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        20,000,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................        +5,400,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................       -28,900,000

        The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for land acquisition,
    an increase of $5,400,000 above the enacted level and
    $28,900,000 below the fiscal year 2000 request. This amount
    includes $16,500,000 for line item projects, $500,000 for
    emergencies and hardships and $3,000,000 for acquisition
    management.
        The Committee recommends the following distribution of
    funds:

                                                                   Committee
            Area and State                                    recommendation
    Cerbat Foothills (AZ)...................................        $500,000
    La Cienega ACEC (NM)....................................       1,000,000
    Otay Mountains/Kuchamaa HCP (CA)........................       1,000,000
    Rock Creek Watershed (Escure Ranch) (WA)................       2,500,000
    Santa Rosa Mountains NSA (CA)...........................       1,000,000
    Spring Gulch (WY).......................................       5,000,000
    Upper Missouri National WSR (MT)........................       5,000,000
    Upper Snake/South Fork Snake River (ID).................         500,000
                        --------------------------------------------------------
                        ____________________________________________________
          Subtotal..........................................      16,500,000
    Emergency/hardship/inholdings...........................         500,000
    Acquisition management..................................       3,000,000
                        --------------------------------------------------------
                        ____________________________________________________
          Total.............................................      20,000,000

                       oregon and california grant lands

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $97,037,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................       101,650,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        99,225,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................        +2,188,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -2,425,000

        The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the
    budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

        The Committee recommends $99,225,000 for the Oregon and
    California grant lands, a decrease of $2,425,000 from the
    budget request and an increase of $2,188,000 above the 1999
    level, including increases above the 1999 level of $2,188,000
    for fixed costs. These funds are provided for construction and
    acquisition, operation and maintenance, and management
    activities on the revested lands in the 18 Oregon and
    California land grant counties of western Oregon.

                               range improvements

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $10,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        10,000,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        10,000,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        The Committee recommends an indefinite appropriation of not
    less than $10,000,000 to be derived from public lands receipts
    and Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenant Act lands grazing receipts.
    Receipts are used for construction, purchase, and maintenance
    of range improvements, such as seeding, fence construction,
    weed control, water development, fish and wildlife habitat
    improvement, and planning and design of these projects.

                   service charges, deposits, and forfeitures

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................        $8,055,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................         8,800,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................         8,800,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................          +745,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        The Committee recommends an indefinite appropriation of
    $8,800,000, the budget request, for service charges, deposits,
    and forfeitures. This account uses the revenues collected under
    specified sections of the Federal Land Policy and Management
    Act of 1976 and other Acts to pay for reasonable administrative
    and other costs in connection with rights-of-way applications
    from the private sector, miscellaneous cost-recoverable realty
    cases, timber contract expenses, repair of damaged lands, the
    adopt-a-horse program, and the provision of copies of official
    public land documents.

                           miscellaneous trust funds

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................        $8,800,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................         7,700,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................         7,700,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................        -1,100,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        The Committee recommends an indefinite appropriation of
    $7,700,000, the budget estimate, for miscellaneous trust funds.
    The Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 provides for
    the receipt and expenditure of moneys received as donations or
    gifts (section 307). Funds in this trust fund are derived from
    the administrative and survey costs paid by applicants for
    conveyance of omitted lands (lands fraudulently or erroneously
    omitted from original cadastral surveys), from advances for
    other types of surveys requested by individuals, and from
    contributions made by users of Federal rangelands. Amounts
    received from the sale of Alaska town lots are also available
    for expenses of sale and maintenance of townsites. Revenue from
    unsurveyed lands, and surveys of omitted lands, administrative
    costs of conveyance, and gifts and donations must be
    appropriated before it can be used.

                    United States Fish and Wildlife Service

        The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is to
    conserve, protect and enhance fish and wildlife and their
    habitats for the continuing benefit of people. The Service has
    responsibility for migratory birds, threatened and endangered
    species, certain marine mammals, and land under Service
    control.
        The Service manages nearly 94 million acres across the
    United States, encompassing a 516-unit National Wildlife Refuge
    System, additional wildlife and wetlands areas, and 66 National
    Fish Hatcheries. A network of law enforcement agents and port
    inspectors enforce Federal laws for the protection of fish and
    wildlife.

                              resource management

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $661,136,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................       724,000,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................       710,700,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................       +49,564,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................       -13,300,000

        The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the
    budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

        The Committee recommends $710,700,000 for resource
    management, a decrease of $13,300,000 below the budget request
    and an increase of $49,564,000 above the fiscal year 1999
    level. The Committee has provided full funding for fixed cost
    increases and has continued to provide increases above current
    year levels to address the Service's large operations and
    maintenance backlogs.
        Ecological services.--The Committee recommends $188,100,000
    for ecological services, a decrease of $10,650,000 below the
    budget request and an increase of $4,192,000 above the fiscal
    year 1999 level. Changes to the budget request include
    decreases of $1,000,000 for candidate conservation, $1,000,000
    for listing, $5,000,000 for consultation, and $4,500,000 for
    recovery, which includes the transfer of $1,500,000 to the
    small landowner incentive program to consolidate private
    landowner partnership activities in that program. The increase
    of $1,500,000 in the landowner incentive program is the result
    of the recommended transfer from the recovery program. Other
    changes include a net decrease of $500,000 for habitat
    conservation, which includes decreases in project planning of
    $600,000 for FERC relicensing and $500,000 for the California
    Bay-Delta program; a decrease of $500,000 for the national
    wetlands inventory; and an increase of $1,100,000 in the
    partners for fish and wildlife program for bull trout
    conservation in Washington State. There is also a decrease of
    $150,000 for the environmental contaminants program.
        Refuges and wildlife.--The Committee recommends
    $327,119,000 for refuges and wildlife, which is equal to the
    budget request and an increase of $32,816,000 above the 1999
    level. A total of $1,000,000, the budget request, is
    recommended to continue the Salton Sea recovery program at the
    1999 level, contingent on matching funds from the State of
    California.
        Fisheries.--The Committee recommends $78,801,000 for
    fisheries, a decrease of $1,000,000 below the budget request
    and an increase of $5,239,000 above the fiscal year 1999 level.
    The decrease is for fish and wildlife management.
        General administration.--The Committee recommends
    $116,680,000 for general administration, a decrease of
    $1,650,000 below the budget request and an increase of
    $7,317,000 above the fiscal year 1999 level. Decreases to the
    budget request include $300,000 for central office
    administration/workforce diversity and $1,350,000 for
    international affairs.
        The Committee agrees to the following:
        1. The Administration should submit a legislative
    reauthorization proposal for the Endangered Species Act, which
    realistically addresses needed reforms.
        2. Funding increases above the 1999 level for ESA programs
    should be directed toward on-the-ground programs and not toward
    so-called ESA reform efforts.
        3. The Service should consider the concerns of the
    Resources Committee in the House of Representatives when
    determining the distribution of ESA funding.
        4. Fixed cost increases and proposed internal transfers are
    included in full in the Committee's recommendations.
        5. Within the program increase above the 1999 level for
    candidate conservation, $400,000 is to continue cooperative
    efforts with the State of Alabama on conservation of the
    Alabama sturgeon.
        6. Within the program increase above the 1999 level for
    consultation, $1,000,000 is for the Sonoran Desert Conservation
    Plan. Local funding of $500,000 will also be made available for
    this program, which has been described by the Administration as
    including ``an astounding diversity of stakeholders and
    interested parties'' and of concern for ``18 Federally listed
    species, including the cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl, and 5
    candidate/proposed species in Pima County'' and ``about 50
    additional state species of concern.'' Secretary Babbitt told
    the Committee that this effort ``is the most exciting attempt
    anywhere in the United States to deal in a community based
    consensus building way with all these issues of open space,
    biological protection, growth.''
        7. The Service should carefully review the data in the
    refuge operating needs system (RONS); identify minimum
    operating needs; and separate those needs from the other
    legitimate needs in the system. The result should be a two-
    tiered RONS system. The minimum needs portion should be
    directly related to the minimum staffing requirements
    identified by the Service at the request of the Committee.
        8. The California-Nevada operations office should be funded
    at the same level as fiscal year 1999, adjusted for fixed cost
    increases identified in the budget. Staffing of this office
    should remain at 9 FTEs.
        9. The program funding increases above the 1999 level are
    not specifically tied to individual initiatives in the 2000
    budget request. The Committee believes that the increases in
    funding above the base budget should be distributed based on
    priority needs of the Service. The Committee does not object to
    funding portions of the initiatives identified in the budget if
    the Service deems them to be top priorities. The Service should
    report to the Committee by October 30, 1999, following the
    established reprogramming procedures, on the specific
    activities it proposes to fund with the increases provided.
    Priorities should be based on sound science and chosen either
    through a competitive solicitation process and/or verified
    through outside expert review.
        10. The Committee does not object to increased staffing for
    refuge operations and maintenance consistent with the minimum
    staffing requirements determined by the Service. These staffing
    increases should be identified in the October 30 report as
    should any staffing increases in other Service programs. The
    Committee encourages the Service to minimize non-refuge
    staffing increases.
        11. The Service should consider combining the migratory
    bird land program with the North American wetlands program to
    achieve economies of scale with respect to program
    administration. The fiscal year 2001 budget request should
    address this issue.
        12. The Service should continue funding, at least at the
    fiscal year 1999 level, for the Upper Colorado River Basin
    program, the Peregrine Fund, the Northwest forest plan
    including the jobs in the woods program, and, in Washington
    State, the ecosystems conservation project, the regional
    fisheries enhancement program, and the Long Live the Kings
    salmon program.
        13. Within the increase above the 1999 level for the
    fisheries program, $500,000 is to maintain operations at
    existing hatcheries. The Service should perform a thorough
    review of, and develop a long-term strategy for, the fisheries
    program in coordination with the National Fish and Wildlife
    Foundation and other outside independent groups. The Committee
    believes strongly that the focus of the program should be
    habitat based rather than hatchery based and that mitigation
    work at hatcheries should be performed on a cost reimbursable
    basis.
        14. The Committee has received complaints about the
    handling of the grizzly bear program by the Service and expects
    the Service to ensure that full public participation is a
    cornerstone of the program.
        15. The Committee supports the efforts in New Mexico to
    enhance the habitat of the endangered silvery minnow and the
    blunt nosed shiner. The Service should use existing Federal
    water allocations in New Mexico to the maximum extent possible
    and work with the Bureau of Reclamation and the Army Corps of
    Engineers to enhance the habitat of these two species in
    compliance with the Endangered Species Act.
        16. The Committee has received many expressions of concern
    with respect to goose population problems, including problems
    with resident Canada geese. These problems involve the over-
    population of snow geese, the problem with dusky Canada geese
    in the Pacific Northwest, and overabundance/nuisance problems
    with Canada geese in various areas of the country. The
    Committee expects the Service to develop a strategic plan for
    dealing with these problems nationwide and to report to the
    Congress on that plan by February 1, 2000. The fiscal year 2001
    budget request should include funds for implementing the plan.
    The Committee has recently become aware of a problem in and
    around the Horicon National Wildlife Refuge in Wisconsin and
    expects the Service to address this problem and problems at
    other refuges in its plan.
        17. The Committee is concerned about predation by Caspian
    Terns on outbound migrating juvenile salmon smolt in the
    Columbia River. The Committee understands that this problem has
    arisen because an island, formed with dredge material by the
    U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, is being used by these birds as a
    nesting ground. Reported estimates are that these birds are
    consuming as much as 25 percent of all salmon smolt coming down
    the river. The Committee is aware of the pilot program put in
    place by the Caspian Tern Working Group and the progress that
    has been made in addressing the predation problem. Because the
    Service is the Federal entity with jurisdiction over migratory
    birds, the Committee believes the Service should take a more
    active role in mitigating the impact of Caspian Terns on
    endangered smolt and urges the Service to use migratory bird
    management funds to develop a mitigation plan, in conjunction
    with the Caspian Tern Working Group, that will include, but not
    be limited to, transporting these birds to areas more in line
    with their natural habitat. The Service should brief the
    Committee on the progress of this effort at least on a semi-
    annual basis, with the first briefing in November 1999.
        18. The Service should work with the Army Corps of
    Engineers and the National Park Service to ensure timely data
    collection and analysis in support of the Fire Island
    Reformulation Study and the Fire Island Interim Project.
        Bill language.--The Committee has included bill language,
    as requested by the Administration, capping the amount of
    funding available for certain endangered species listing
    programs. The amount for fiscal year 2000 is $6,532,000.
    Language to cap funding for critical habitat designation, as
    requested by the Administration, has not been included.
        Bill language also is included to permit the retention and
    use of funds from reimbursable agreements with private
    entities. This is a clarification of language included in the
    fiscal year 1999 Act, which makes it clear that the Committee
    intends these funds to be available for use by the Service.
    Language also is included to allow limited advance payments
    under cooperative agreements in order to permit obligation of
    funds for reimbursable agreements with non-Federal government
    entities in advance of payments from such entities. The Service
    is encouraged to partner with States, local governments and
    tribes to leverage scarce Federal dollars. The Committee
    expects the Service to use this advance obligation authority
    sparingly and to cite it, and include the reasons why it is
    necessary, in any partnership agreement for which it is to be
    used. Further, to use this authority, the Director must make a
    finding in writing that (1) the agreement will result in
    specific national benefits to the mission of the Service; (2)
    the partner, based on past history and fiscal credit
    worthiness, will pay its share of the agreement in a timely
    manner; and (3) the agreement has been signed by the
    appropriate governmental official with authority to commit his
    or her organization to the payments in the agreement without
    qualification.

                                  construction

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $88,065,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        43,569,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        43,933,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................       -44,132,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................          +364,000

        The Committee recommends $43,933,000 for construction, an
    increase of $364,000 above the fiscal year 2000 budget request
    and a decrease of $44,132,000 below the fiscal year 1999 level.
        The Committee agrees to the following distribution of
    funds:

                                                [in thousands of dollars]
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                               Budget       Committee
                     Project                           Description            request    recommendation   Difference
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    6 National Fish Hatcheries in New England  Water treatment                    1,803          1,803             0
                                                improvements.
    Alchesay/Williams Creek NFH, AZ..........  Environmental pollution              373            373             0
                                                control.
    Anchorage OAS, AK........................  Hangar--phase 1............          536            536             0
    Bear River NWR, UT.......................  Dikes/water control                  450            450             0
                                                structures.
    Bear River NWR, UT.......................  Education/visitor center...            0          1,500         1,500
    Brazoria NWR, TX.........................  Replace Walker Bridge......          277            277             0
    Cabo Rojo NWR, PR........................  Replace office building....          639            639             0
    Chase Lake NWR, ND.......................  Construct vehicle shop.....          625            625             0
    Chincoteague NWR, VA.....................  Headquarters/visitor center        1,000          1,000             0
    Cross Creeks NWR, TN.....................  5 bridges/water control            1,500          1,500             0
                                                structures.
    Dexter NFH, NM...........................  Irrigation wells...........            0            524           524
    Genoa NFH, WI............................  Water supply system........        1,717          1,717             0
    Hagerman NFH, ID.........................  Replace main hatchery              1,000          1,000             0
                                                building.
    Hatchie NWR,TN...........................  Log Landing Slough Bridge..          284            284             0
    Hatchie NWR,TN...........................  Loop Road/Bear Creek Bridge          367            367             0
    Havasu NWR, AZ...........................  Replace/rehabilitate 3               409            409             0
                                                bridges.
    Innoko NWR, AK...........................  Hangar--phase 1............          129            129             0
    J.N. Ding Darling NWR, FL................  Construction of exhibits...            0            750           750
    Lake Thibadeau NWR, MT...................  Lake Thibadeau diversion             250            250             0
                                                dam.
    Little White Salmon NFH, WA..............  Replace upper raceways.....        3,990          3,990             0
    Mattamuskeet NWR, NC.....................  Structural columns in Lodge          600            600             0
    Mattamuskeet NWR, NC.....................  Refuge sewage system.......          400            400             0
    McKinney Lake NFH, NC....................  Dam safety construction....          600            600             0
    Mississippi River Discovery Center, IA...  Construction of exhibits...            0            300           300
    Natchitoches NFH, LA.....................  Aeration & electrical                750            750             0
                                                system.
    National Eagle & Wildlife Repository.....  Eagle processing laboratory          176            176             0
    National Eagle & Wildlife Repository, CO.  Storage units..............           65             65             0
    Necedah NWR, WI..........................  Rynearson #2 dam...........        3,440          3,440             0
    Neosho NFH, MO...........................  Rehabilitate deficient pond          450            450             0
    NFW Forensics Laboratory, OR.............  Forensics laboratory                 500            500             0
                                                expansion.
    Nowitna NWR, AK..........................  Hangar--phase 1............          106            106             0
    Parker River NWR, MA.....................  Headquarters complex.......        3,160              0        -3,160
    Salt Plains NWR, OK......................  Wilson's Pond Bridge.......           74             74             0
    San Bernard NWR, TX......................  Woods Road Bridge..........           75             75             0
    Seney NWR, MI............................  Replace water control              1,450          1,450             0
                                                structure.
    Sevilleta NWR, NM........................  Replace office/visitor               927            927             0
                                                building.
    Smith Island NWR, MD.....................  Restoration................            0            450           450
    St. Marks NWR, FL........................  Otter Lake public use                200            200             0
                                                facilities.
    St. Vincent NWR, FL......................  Repair/Replace support               556            556             0
                                                facilities.
    Tern Island, NWR, HI.....................  Rehabilitate seawall.......        1,800          1,800             0
    Tishomingo NFH, OK.......................  Pennington Creek Footbridge           44             44             0
    Tishomingo NWR, OK.......................  Replace/rehabilitate 2                54             54             0
                                                bridges.
    White River NFH, VT......................  Replace roof/modify                  600            600             0
                                                structures.
    Wichita Mountains WR, OK.................  Road rehabilitation........        1,564          1,564             0
    Wichita Mountains WR, OK.................  Replace/rehabilitate 23            1,537          1,537             0
                                                bridges.
                                              ----------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal...........................  ...........................       34,477         34,841           364
    Servicewide bridge safety inspections....  ...........................          495            495             0
    Servicewide dam safety inspections.......  ...........................          545            545             0
    Construction management..................  ...........................        8,052          8,052             0
                                              ----------------------------------------------------------------------
          Totals.............................  ...........................       43,569         43,933           364
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

        The Committee agrees to the following:
        1. The $300,000 provided for exhibits at the Mississippi
    River Discovery Center, IA represents the full Federal
    commitment to this effort.
        2. The funding provided for the Bear River NWR, UT is
    contingent on a 50 percent non-Federal cost share for the
    visitor center portion of the project.
        3. The Committee supports the Parker River NWR, MA project
    and recently approved a reprogramming for this effort.
    Sufficient unobligated funding remains so that further funding
    is not needed for fiscal year 2000. Funding in 2001 and beyond
    should be justified by the Service consistent with the
    direction contained in the recent reprogramming approval.
        4. The funding provided for exhibits at the Ding Darling
    NWR, FL represents the total Federal funding for this project.
    Most of the funding for this visitors center has been raised
    privately and the Committee commends the Ding Darling friends
    group for its impressive efforts in that regard.
        5. Funds are provided for the Shiawassee NWR, MI under the
    land acquisition account, with the understanding that a
    visitors center will be constructed and equipped at the refuge
    using funding entirely from non-Federal sources.

                                land acquisition

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $48,024,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        73,632,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        42,000,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................        -6,024,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................       -31,632,000

        The Committee recommends $42,000,000 for land acquisition,
    a decrease of $6,024,000 below the enacted level and
    $31,632,000 below the fiscal year 2000 budget request. This
    amount includes $31,835,000 for line item projects, $750,000
    for inholdings, $1,000,000 for emergencies and hardships,
    $750,000 for exchanges and $7,665,000 for acquisition
    management.
        The Committee recommends the following distribution of
    funds:
                                                                   Committee
            Area and State                                    recommendation
    Atchafalaya NWR (LA)....................................      $1,000,000
    Balcones Canyonlands (TX)...............................       2,000,000
    Buenos Aires NWR (Leslie Canyon) (AZ)...................       1,500,000
    Canaan Valley NWR (WV)..................................         500,000
    E.B. Forsythe NWR (NJ)..................................         800,000
    Grand Bay NWR (AL)......................................       1,500,000
    Great Swamp NWR (NJ)....................................         700,000
    J.N. Ding Darling NWR (FL)..............................       4,000,000
    Lower Rio Grande Valley NWR (TX)........................       2,000,000
    Nisqually NWR (WA)......................................         850,000
    Northern Forest:........................................
        Lake Umbagog NWR (NH/ME)............................       3,000,000
        Moosehorn NWR (ME)..................................       2,000,000
    Pelican Island (FL).....................................       2,000,000
    Petit Manan NWR (ME)....................................         250,000
    Rappahannock River NWR (VA).............................       1,100,000
    San Diego NWR (CA)......................................       3,100,000
    Shiawassee NWR (MI).....................................         835,000
    Silvio Conte NWR (Nulhegan) (NH)........................         500,000
    Stewart McKinney NWR (CT)...............................       2,700,000
    Waccamaw NWR (SC).......................................       1,500,000
                        --------------------------------------------------------
                        ____________________________________________________
          Subtotal..........................................      31,835,000
                        ========================================================
                        ____________________________________________________
    Emergencies/Hardship....................................       1,000,000
    Inholdings..............................................         750,000
    Exchanges...............................................         750,000
    Acquisition Management..................................       7,665,000
                        --------------------------------------------------------
                        ____________________________________________________
          Total.............................................      42,000,000

        The Committee is concerned that two projects were included
    in the fiscal year 2000 request for land acquisition at the
    Oahu Forest in Hawaii and the Northern Tallgrass in Minnesota
    neither of which is an officially designated refuge. The
    Committee directs the Service not to propose funding for
    proposed refuges in the future. The Committee does not intend
    that this direction be an encouragement to the Service to
    establish new refuges using non-appropriated funds.
        The Committee recognizes the sensitivities of the local
    community pertaining to the creation of the Teche Black Bear
    Refuge. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service shall continue to
    acquire timberlands within the Bailey property contingent on a
    mutually-acceptable land swap agreement between current
    property users, within the refuge, and the Service.
        Funding for the Shiawassee NWR is provided contingent upon
    a signed agreement stipulating that the visitors center will be
    built and equipped entirely with non-Federal funds.

                cooperative endangered species conservation fund

        Eighty percent of the habitat for more than half of the
    listed endangered and threatened species is on private land.
    The Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund provides
    grants to States and Territories for endangered species
    recovery actions on non-Federal lands and provides funds for
    non-Federal land acquisition to facilitate habitat protection.
    Individual States and territories provide 25 percent of grant
    project costs. Cost sharing is reduced to 10 percent when two
    or more States or territories are involved in a project.

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $14,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        80,000,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        15,000,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................        +1,000,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................       -65,000,000

        The Committee recommends $15,000,000 for the cooperative
    endangered species conservation fund, a decrease of $65,000,000
    below the budget request and an increase of $1,000,000 above
    the fiscal year 1999 level. The recommended amount provides a
    total of $7,000,000 for HCP land acquisition, which is
    $1,000,000 more than the current funding level.
        The Committee has not agreed to sizable increases in land
    acquisition, either through the Cooperative Endangered Species
    Conservation Fund or through the Land Acquisition account for
    the Service. The Committee has asked the General Accounting
    Office to undertake a review of land acquisition management by
    the Service. Decisions on increasing land acquisition funding
    in the future will be made after that review has been
    completed.

                         National wildlife refuge fund

        Through this program the Service makes payments to counties
    in which Service lands are located based on their fair market
    value. Payments to counties are estimated to be $16,829,000 in
    fiscal year 2000 with $10,779,000 derived from this
    appropriation and $6,050,000 from net refuge receipts estimated
    to be collected in fiscal year 1999.

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $10,779,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        10,000,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        10,779,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................          +779,000

        The Committee recommends $10,779,000 for the National
    wildlife refuge fund, an increase of $779,000 above the budget
    request and equal to the fiscal year 1999 funding level.
        The Committee is concerned about the priorities of the
    Service with respect to how they relate to meeting its
    obligations under the National Wildlife Refuge Fund. In
    particular, the Committee questions why the Service has
    continued to acquire appreciably more land over the past few
    years and yet has not requested additional funding for the
    National wildlife refuge fund. This issue should be addressed
    in the 2001 budget request.

                   north american wetlands conservation fund

        The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, through the North
    American Wetlands Fund, leverages partner contributions for
    wetlands conservation. Projects to date have been in 46 States,
    10 Canadian provinces and 17 Mexican states. In addition to
    this appropriation, the Service receives funding from receipts
    in the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration account from taxes
    on firearms, ammunition, archery equipment, pistols and
    revolvers, and from the Sport Fish Restoration account from
    taxes on fishing tackle and equipment, electric trolling motors
    and fish finders and certain marine gasoline taxes. By law,
    sport fish restoration receipts are used for coastal wetlands
    in States bordering the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans, States
    bordering the Great Lakes, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands,
    Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the
    Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands and American Samoa.

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $15,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        15,000,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        15,000,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        The Committee recommends $15,000,000 for the North American
    wetlands conservation fund, which is equal to both the budget
    request and the fiscal year 1999 level.

                  wildlife conservation and appreciation fund

        The Wildlife Conservation and Appreciation Fund provides
    grants to States for inventory and population determinations of
    fish and wildlife species, for identification of fish and
    wildlife habitat and associated problems, and for actions to
    conserve and restore habitat and to provide public use
    opportunities.

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................          $800,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................           800,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................           800,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        The Committee recommends $800,000 for the wildlife
    conservation and appreciation fund, which is equal to both the
    budget request and the fiscal year 1999 level.

                    multinational species conservation fund

        This account combines funding for the former rewards and
    operations (African elephant) account, the former rhinoceros
    and tiger conservation account, and the Asian elephant program.
        The African Elephant Act of 1988 established a fund for
    assisting nations and organizations involved with conservation
    of African elephants. The Service provides grants to African
    Nations and to qualified organizations and individuals to
    protect and manage critical populations of these elephants.
        The Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Act of 1994
    authorized programs to enhance compliance with the Convention
    on International Trade in Endangered Species and U.S. or
    foreign laws prohibiting the taking or trade of rhinoceros,
    tigers or their habitat.
        The Asian Elephant Conservation Act of 1997 authorized a
    grant program, similar to the African elephant program, to
    enable cooperators from regional and range country agencies and
    organizations to address Asian elephant conservation problems.
    The world's surviving populations of wild Asian elephants are
    found in 13 south and southeastern Asian countries.

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................        $2,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................         3,000,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................         2,000,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -1,000,000

        The Committee recommends $2,000,000 for the multinational
    species conservation fund, equal to the 1999 level and a
    decrease of $1,000,000 below the budget request. The
    recommended funding includes $1,000,000 for African elephant
    conservation, $500,000 for rhinoceros and tiger conservation
    and $500,000 for Asian elephant conservation. The Committee
    expects these funds to be matched by non-Federal funding to
    leverage private contributions to the maximum extent possible.

                             National Park Service

        The mission of the National Park Service is to preserve
    unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the
    national park system for the enjoyment, education, and
    inspiration of this and future generations. The Park Service
    cooperates with partners to extend the benefits of natural and
    cultural resource conservation and outdoor recreation
    throughout this country and the world.
        The National Park Service, established in 1916, has
    stewardship responsibilities for the protection and
    preservation of the heritage resources of the National Park
    System. The system, consisting of 378 separate and distinct
    units, is recognized globally as a leader in park management
    and resource preservation. The national park system represents
    much of the finest the Nation has to offer in terms of scenery,
    historical and archeological relics, and cultural heritage.
    Through its varied sites, the Park Service attempts to explain
    America's history, interpret its culture, preserve examples of
    its natural ecosystems, and provide recreational and
    educational opportunities for U.S. citizens and visitors from
    all over the world. In addition, the Park Service provides
    support to tribal, local, and State governments to preserve
    culturally significant, ecologically important, and public
    recreational lands.

                     operation of the National park system

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................    $1,287,924,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................     1,389,627,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................     1,387,307,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................       +99,383,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -2,320,000

        The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the
    budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

        The National Park Service is one of the largest agencies
    funded in the Interior appropriations bill, and over the years,
    has received significant increases in funding to address the
    critical resource and visitor use requirements of the Service.
    These increases have been provided during a time of extreme
    budget constraints and represent operational increases for the
    parks that have been much greater than the overall annual
    funding increases for the bill. The Committee continues to be
    concerned that the National Park Service views funding for its
    programs as an entitlement and has failed to address seriously
    the Committee's concerns regarding management and oversight of
    funding and programs. The Committee continues to be frustrated
    by the Service's inability to develop a simple, yet
    comprehensive method for tracking accomplishments against
    identified needs and available funding--whether this funding be
    from appropriations, fees, or other sources.
        While the Committee acknowledges the need for some degree
    of flexibility in the way parks implement and manage programs,
    the Committee observes that the Service continues to struggle
    with developing any sort of cohesive, consistent approach to
    how individual programs are managed. While the Service
    downsizing several years ago shifted greater responsibility and
    authority to the parks, this decentralization did not obviate
    the need for the Service to operate as one agency, rather than
    378 independent parks, 7 autonomous regions, and a Washington
    office. While the Committee is not advocating a centralization
    of all Service decision-making, a concerted effort must be made
    at all levels of Park Service management, including park
    superintendents and regional directors, to exercise greater
    responsibility in implementing programs with an eye towards
    servicewide goals, and not individual whims.
        The Committee recommends $1,387,307,000 for operation of
    the National Park System for fiscal year 2000, an increase of
    $99,383,000 above the enacted level and a decrease of
    $2,320,000 below the Administration request. This amount was
    appropriated last year through the Emergency Supplemental
    Appropriations Bill and was not intended to be added to the
    base. The Committee continues to consider operational
    shortfalls and backlog maintenance to be its highest priorities
    and has again focused increases in these two areas.
        The bill provides a total increase of $43,277,000 for park
    base operations, an increase of $18,277,000 above the amount
    proposed in the President's 2000 budget. This increase reflects
    the Committee's ongoing commitment to the day-to-day concerns
    that make parks accessible to visitors and provide for resource
    protection and management in fulfillment of the National Park
    Service mission. The Service has recently implemented a
    comprehensive system for identification of Service operational
    requirements, and expects these park base increases to be used
    to address the highest priorities servicewide, and not to
    target theme-oriented initiatives proposed in the budget beyond
    the amounts approved by the Committee. Within the funds
    provided, the Service is to continue funding for the recurring
    elements of the anti-terrorism supplemental that was approved
    last year and which were proposed for inclusion in the fiscal
    year 2000 budget.
        Also included in the increase is $29,686,000 for fixed
    costs, including pay increases for fiscal year 2000, and a
    $9,000,000 increase for Cyclic Maintenance and Repair and
    Rehabilitation projects. The Committee has provided large
    increases the last several years for this purpose and is
    concerned that the parks are having a difficult time expending
    the funds. To assist the Park Service, the Committee approved a
    reprogramming of $3,500,000 from the Repair and Rehabilitation
    account to help deal with the increased workload due to both
    the increase in Federal appropriation and funds from the
    Recreation Fee Demonstration Program dedicated to reducing
    backlog maintenance problems in parks. The Committee expects
    that these funds will be spent in a timely manner.
        The Committee has provided significant increases for the
    Service's natural resource initiative, including inventory and
    monitoring, natural resource preservation, native and exotic
    species management and for geologic expertise. The Committee
    applauds the Service for recognizing that the preservation of
    the diverse natural elements and the great scenic beauty of
    America's national parks and other units should be as high a
    priority in the Service as providing visitor services.
        A major part of protecting those resources is knowing what
    they are, where they are, how they interact with their
    environment and what condition they are in. This involves a
    serious commitment from the leadership of the National Park
    Service to insist that the superintendents carry out a
    systematic, consistent, professional inventory and monitoring
    program, along with other scientific activities, that is
    regularly updated to ensure that the Service makes sound
    resource decisions based on sound scientific data.
        The Committee directs the Service to provide an annual
    report that details how these funds are expended, timetables
    for results and any internal memos or directives from the
    Director concerning this effort. The Committee intends to
    monitor this initiative very closely, including the level and
    consistency of support in the parks, as well as seeing
    measurable results prior to any future dollars being allocated
    for this effort. This is an important opportunity which the
    Committee hopes the Park Service takes seriously.
        The bill contains additional increases for the Cultural
    programs, Vanishing Treasures initiative, overflight planning
    and management and the Challenge Cost Share program. A more
    detailed description of other increases and decreases can be
    found later in this section.
        The Committee has provided $1,000,000 for Recreation Fee
    Program management instead of the $2,500,000 requested. It is
    not clear to this Committee why the central offices need more
    funds to manage this program. Many superintendents also seem to
    share this view. This Committee provided the authority to
    expand the fee program and return the revenues to the parks,
    yet most of the added revenues have come from increasing fees,
    not from the addition of new collection sites or programs.
    Moreover, the workload associated with formulating and tracking
    fee-funded projects is a burden mostly affecting park staff,
    with central office staff charged with coordination and program
    oversight. The parks are already spending $22 million on fee
    collection operations and management. Accordingly, the
    Committee has determined that $1,000,000 is sufficient at this
    time to meet central office responsibilities. No additional
    funds should be made available from any other sources to
    supplement this amount without prior approval of the House and
    Senate Appropriations Committees.
        The Committee has asked the Service for years to provide an
    accurate, consistent, updated list of priority backlog
    maintenance projects, not including roads which are funded
    separately under the Federal Lands Highway program and Housing
    which is currently undergoing a clarification in policy and
    condition assessments. The Service claimed that it has a
    backlog in excess of $8,000,000,000. The General Accounting
    Office was asked to review these lists and testified to the
    Congress that the list was not credible, there were brand new
    construction projects in with backlog projects, the Service was
    not using any common definition, and the data was inconsistent
    and outdated. This has caused a serious credibility problem
    with the Congress.
        While the Department deserves credit for beginning to solve
    this problem with the five year priority backlog construction
    list, it is still unable to provide the Committee with a total
    priority backlog list or a reasonable date when that
    information would be available. The Committee commends the
    budget office and the Development Advisory Board for their work
    in carefully reviewing construction project requests. Despite
    these efforts only $1,200,000,000 in backlog projects can be
    justified. The budget contains two increases to begin to
    address this problem, but the Committee is not convinced these
    funds will yield credible results in a reasonable period of
    time.
        One thing the Committee has learned from experience is that
    merely giving the Service additional money does not always
    solve problems. A case in point is the $2,000,000 the Committee
    appropriated several years ago for housing assessments. The
    assessments are complete, yet the Service is still arguing over
    the policy and it is probable that the information gained from
    the assessments will not be used because the Service did not
    like the results.
        Therefore, the Committee has not provided the $1,000,000
    for a new Maintenance Management System nor has it provided the
    $2,500,000 for facility condition assessments by outside
    consultants. Congress has provided over $6,000,000 to the
    Service in prior years to develop and implement a maintenance
    management system. By the Service's own admission, this system
    has failed. The Committee is not yet convinced that a new
    system will be different.
        The Committee is equally cautious about providing the
    $2,500,000 for condition assessments. The Committee has
    provided over $250,000,000 in just the last two years alone for
    increases to the parks. This amount includes new FTEs as well
    as other costs. In addition, the large parks have extensive
    maintenance staffs and qualified maintenance supervisors who
    have the ability to conduct condition assessments on their
    structures. The Committee would be surprised if the parks did
    not conduct condition assessments on their structures on a
    regular basis. The Department claims that with increases each
    year, the assessments could be completed within five years. The
    Service's estimate is in excess of ten years. Both timetables
    are unacceptable.
        It is obvious that the Department and the Service are not
    in sync on how to resolve the question of what is the true
    backlog. There appears to be no clear plan, timetable or budget
    for this exercise, nor is there a priority list of parks and
    facilities that would benefit from the first year's funding. In
    addition, there is no consideration for the park's in-house
    expertise. Most importantly, there is no ``buy-in'' from the
    Park Service.
        Before the Committee provides additional taxpayer funds for
    this purpose, the Department and the Service must take these
    issues seriously and present the Committee with a clear and
    defined strategy, including specific goals, timetables,
    measurements and costs. The Committee will expect this
    information no later than January 30, 2000.
        The Committee is aware of recent problems involving both
    the retention of experienced officers within the United States
    Park Police as well as unacceptable past employment practices
    and treatment of many female officers within the Force. The
    Committee is also aware of, and strongly supports, the recent
    commitment of the Department, the National Park Service and the
    Park Police, to eliminate all vestiges of past discriminatory
    employment practices or harassment that female officers may
    have experienced during their employment with the Park Police.
    The Committee will expect the National Park Service to focus on
    U.S. Park Police pay and nondiscriminatory employment
    management practices by the Park Police during fiscal year
    2000, so that all forms of disparate treatment or inappropriate
    behavior are eliminated. The Park Police should also make an
    accelerated effort to recruit additional women as officers in
    the U.S. Park Police.
        South Florida Restoration Initiative.--The Committee
    continues its long-standing commitment to the environmental
    restoration of the Everglades and other natural areas in South
    Florida. Included in this bill is $114,000,000 contained in the
    budgets of four Department of the Interior bureaus to continue
    funding the science, research, construction and land
    acquisition needs. The Committee is concerned that the
    Administration's budget reduced the Everglades research by
    $4,000,000. The Committee has long believed that a strong
    science program is critical to the success of this project,
    which seeks to build a man-made plumbing system that will
    replicate the natural systems disturbed or destroyed by
    draining, installing dikes and channeling the rivers. The
    Administration has assured the Committee that this reduction
    will not jeopardize the success of the project.
        The Committee held its first oversight hearing on the South
    Florida Restoration Project earlier this year. Because the
    Congress has spent over $1,300,000,000 on this initiative over
    the past five years, the Committee asked the General Accounting
    Office (GAO) to review three issues: (1) How effectively have
    the funds been spent? (2) How well has the restoration effort
    been coordinated and managed? and, (3) Are there any issues,
    which left unresolved, could significantly impede the progress
    of this effort in the future?
        The GAO report raised several concerns. While the South
    Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force has compiled many
    reports on the status of this effort, GAO found that there is
    no overall strategic plan. The Committee directs the Task Force
    to develop a strategic plan that includes the Federal and non-
    Federal activities necessary to accomplish all three goals of
    the restoration effort. This plan should among other things:
    (1) clearly outline how the restoration of the ecosystem will
    occur, including measurable goals and performance measures, (2)
    identify the resources needed to achieve full restoration, (3)
    assign accountability for accomplishing actions, and (4) link
    the goals of the initiative to outcome-oriented annual goals.
        This strategic plan should be submitted to the Committee
    prior to the implementation of the Central and Southern Florida
    Project Comprehensive Review Study, but no later than February
    1, 2000. The plan should be updated annually or as a result of
    any major changes in the restoration effort. In addition, a
    report on the status of Federal funds should be submitted to
    the Committee by March 1st of every year.
        Another issue of concern is that there is no official
    estimate of the total cost of the restoration effort. The
    Committee directs the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task
    Force to prepare and submit to the Committee no later than
    January 30, 2000, an estimate of the total cost of restoring
    the South Florida ecosystem, including both the Federal and
    non-Federal shares. This estimate should, among other things,
    include: (1) the cost of the activities planned by all Federal
    and non-Federal participants to accomplish the three goals of
    the initiative; namely (a) getting the water right, (b)
    restoring and enhancing the natural habitat, and (c)
    transforming the built environment, and (2) a projected
    completion date for the restoration initiative. This estimate
    should be updated and submitted to the Committee on an annual
    basis.
        With the large number of participants involved in this
    effort, including 15 Federal agencies, the State of Florida,
    local governments, Indian tribes and other private
    organizations, many of whom have different mandates and
    interests, problems and conflicts that could delay the
    completion of projects and activities are bound to arise.
    Already, two ongoing infrastructure projects that are integral
    to the restoration effort are taking longer and costing more
    than planned. Both the Modified Water Deliveries and the C-111
    projects are more than 2 years behind schedule and together
    could cost about $80,000,000 more to complete than originally
    estimated.
        While the Task Force is responsible for facilitating the
    resolution of interagency and intergovernmental conflicts among
    partners, and has done an admirable job to date, the Task Force
    is a coordinating body, not a decision-making entity which has
    binding authority to resolve serious conflicts and thus is
    limited in its ability to manage and be accountable for the
    overall restoration effort. Because of the complexity of the
    project, it is reasonable to assume that conflicts will become
    more common. Unless a clear mechanism with clear lines of
    authority is developed to resolve these conflicts quickly,
    there will be more delays and cost overruns. This is not
    acceptable to the Committee or to the agencies and programs
    contained in this bill that are affected by the enormous
    resources channeled to this initiative. Therefore, the
    Committee directs the Administration and the Task Force to
    recommend a process with direct binding authority for resolving
    conflicts quickly. This may require new legislative authority,
    which the Committee will seriously consider. The current system
    is not acceptable. The Committee expects the Administration and
    the Task Force to submit their recommendations to the Committee
    by January 15, 2000.
        The Committee directed the Secretary of the Interior to
    submit by March 31, 1999 a comprehensive land acquisition plan
    in priority order for non-Federal lands as part of the South
    Florida ecosystem restoration effort. The Committee notes that
    an incomplete list was just recently unofficially provided.
    This Committee has been very patient over the last five years
    and is concerned that the Secretary has not provided a complete
    official response to this simple request. One of the
    Committee's concerns in making this request has been confirmed
    by the Secretary's inaction. It is obvious that the partners
    cannot agree on priorities and do not want to be accountable to
    the Congress that provides fifty percent of these funds. This
    blatant disregard of such a reasonable request cannot be
    tolerated and the requested information should be provided
    forthwith by the Secretary.
        As in the past, the Committee has retained the bill
    language requiring a 50 percent State match in newly
    appropriated dollars.
        Bill language is included under the land acquisition
    account which makes the federal and state acquisition for South
    Florida contingent upon: (1) an agreement between principle
    partners which provides specifics to achieve guaranteed water
    supply to the Everglades and other related lands, (2)
    submission of a legislative package to achieve that goal and
    (3) submission of a complete, non-federal land acquisition
    priority list.
        Ellis Island.--The Committee has included $1,000,000 in the
    construction account, as requested by the Administration, to
    continue the critical emergency stabilization work on the South
    side of Ellis Island. In addition, the Committee has included
    bill language in the Construction account which allows the Park
    Service to retain 100 percent of the Service's share of ferry
    revenues, which amount to approximately $6,000,000 every year.
    These funds had previously gone to the General Fund in the
    Treasury. The Committee has placed two conditions on the use of
    these funds including (1) revenues must be used for
    stabilization and rehabilitation work and, (2) beginning in
    fiscal year 2001 these funds must be matched on a dollar for
    dollar basis. The Committee is hopeful that it will not be
    difficult to raise these matching funds for one of the most
    important historical sites in the National Park System.
        Housing.--For several years, the Committee has been
    concerned about the cost and extent of the Service's employee
    housing program. The Committee has been very supportive of the
    need to assure that quality housing is provided when it is
    necessary to protect resources and serve visitors. However, the
    cost of providing housing has been staggering. Over the past 10
    years, the Committee has appropriated nearly $200 million to
    repair and construct Park Service employee housing, and the
    agency has estimated that it needs another $300 million to
    repair and replace some of its existing housing inventory.
    While we have supported the agency in the past, we are
    convinced that the Service has not done all it can to assure
    that it provides housing only when absolutely necessary; that
    apartments or duplex housing are considered in place of single
    family homes; and that common design and planning documents are
    used to ensure cost effective housing.
        In the early 1990's, it was clear from General Accounting
    Office reports that the Park Service could not justify the need
    for all of its current housing. In 1996, the Department of the
    Interior's Inspector General reported on agency practices which
    led to the construction of $500,000 homes in Yosemite and Grand
    Canyon--excessively expensive by any measure. As a direct
    result of language in both the 1996 Omnibus Parks Act and the
    Interior Appropriations Act, the Service hired an independent
    consultant to conduct a needs assessment based on directions
    from the Washington office. In addition, the Director committed
    to a revised housing policy which would (1) minimize the
    agency's need for housing by relying more on the private sector
    and (2) exhaust all alternatives to in-park housing before
    replacing or constructing additional park housing. Both were
    accomplished last year and the Committee's initial reaction was
    favorable.
        However, the Committee has been greatly disappointed to
    watch the events of the last six months regarding both
    implementation of the policy and the results of the needs
    assessments which cost the American taxpayers $2,000,000! The
    park managers don't like the policy or the assessments which
    indicated that about 75 percent of the parks had too much
    housing. In fact, the park managers feel that they need what
    exists and more. As of this date, the Service has taken no
    definitive action to resolve the conflict. The Committee is
    concerned that the Park Service may be trying to develop a new
    policy that will justify its existing, or an expanded housing
    stock, rather than devising ways to ensure consistent
    application and compliance with the existing policy.
        In addition, it appears that little has been accomplished
    in implementing alternatives to in-park housing where
    appropriate, despite the fact that the authorizing committee
    gave the Service new authority last year (which the Service had
    requested) that expands the alternatives available for
    construction and repair of housing and provides incentives to
    the private sector to finance or provide housing. In fact,
    there are so few examples of alternatives being implemented
    that it raises questions about whether alternatives are being
    pursued at all.
        While this Committee does not want to write the National
    Park Service's Housing Policy, it will not tolerate the status
    quo or a greatly watered down policy which allows all existing
    housing plus additional new housing in every unit of the
    Service, particularly when affordable housing is available
    within a reasonable distance. While the Committee might
    understand some minor adjustments to the consultant's
    recommendations or even the policy itself, a complete overhaul
    is not acceptable. The Committee is concerned that park
    superintendents are more interested in defending past housing
    practices, rather than taking a critical look at what makes
    economic sense for the future. Convenience and experience are
    not sufficient factors to justify housing. Other Federal
    agencies have resource protection missions commensurate with
    the Park Service in equally remote locations and manage with
    significantly less numbers of housing units. If the Service
    contends that housing is justified, it should substantiate
    these claims with appropriate programmatic and financial
    analysis.
        The Committee directs the Service to make the hard
    decisions that need to be made. This includes developing a
    policy that will be implemented fairly, that recognizes the
    fact that there is a limited amount of Federal money and makes
    good use of the legislative authorities that the Congress has
    provided the Service. A policy, complete with a detailed
    strategy including specific timetables, priority parks housing
    needs and total costs, should be provided to the Committee no
    later than September 1, 1999. The Committee will need this
    information in order to complete conference on the fiscal year
    2000 bill. There is currently $17,000,000 that was appropriated
    last year for trailer replacement which has not been obligated
    due to the lack of policy and the Committee has included
    another $13,500,000 in this bill for the same purpose. Should
    the Service not have a reasonable policy and plan for
    implementation by September 1, the Committee will redirect
    these funds to other needs in the bill.
        Business plans.--The Committee continues to be very
    supportive of the Service's business plan initiative but is
    growing frustrated that Service leadership has focused so
    little attention on analyzing the results of the first eight
    demonstration projects. At this stage, the Service should be
    able to refine the best aspects of these projects and be
    working toward a final template which can be used in all parks.
    The Committee sees particular value in the documentation and
    analysis parks engage in to ascertain how they are spending
    funds available to them. It is not the intention of this
    Committee to use the business plan products to justify millions
    of dollars of unmet needs. Rather, it is to ensure that parks
    can articulate why they have made the decisions they have with
    regard to the allocation of resources. More money and more
    people cannot be the answer to every management challenge.
        The Committee is also concerned that this project has been
    delayed due to concerns about how it interfaces with the GPRA
    initiative. The Committee does not agree with these concerns
    and directs the Service to move quickly to the next logical
    step in promoting the business plan concept. The Committee does
    not agree that it conflicts in any way with GPRA or that there
    should be any modifications undertaken which result in any
    delay of final implementation. The Committee expects a report
    of the status of this effort by January 30, 2000.
        Partnerships.--The Committee has supported and encouraged
    partnerships between the Service and other Federal and non-
    Federal partners. To assist, the Congress has even provided new
    and expanded legislative authorities over the last several
    years. However, the Committee is concerned about several
    projects that seem to be driven more by local and regional
    interests rather than the interest of the National Park
    Service. As long as there are common goals, and the project
    fills a high priority Federal need, the Committee will support
    the project. The Park Service superintendents and planners
    should be very careful about following this guidance. The
    Committee will not hesitate to revoke the broad discretionary
    authorities that it has entrusted to the Service if this trend
    continues.
        Other.--The Committee requests that $125,000 be allocated
    from operational increases provided above the Administration's
    request, for a study to extend the Mt. Vernon multi-use trail
    north to I-495. This study should include alternatives that
    incorporate county lands and national park lands as routes to
    achieve this objective.
        The Committee encourages the National Park Service to
    continue to work with the National Highway Traffic Safety
    Administration and the Justice Department to develop and
    implement a program to photograph automatically speeding
    vehicles and issue violation notices to speeders on the George
    Washington Memorial Parkway. This program is intended to
    improve the safety of motorists using the Parkway.
        The Mount Vernon Trail, which is part of the George
    Washington Memorial Parkway, is an 18.5 mile multi-use trail
    that handles over 500,000 users each year. There is great
    disregard for the rules and regulations that govern the safe
    use of the trail and protection of all users. The Committee
    directs the Service to provide greater enforcement on the
    trail. Funds should be provided from the increase to the
    operations budget over the Administration's request.
        Within the interpretation and education program, a one-time
    amount of $65,000 is provided for the Claude Moore Colonial
    Farm at Turkey Run Park to support educational programs which
    foster public understanding and appreciation of the importance
    of agriculture in the development of American society. The
    Committee has been very generous in providing these funds for
    the past several years, however, these funds will not be
    provided in future years. The Committee strongly encourages the
    local friends group to begin to raise the private funds that
    will be needed to support this activity in the future.
        The Committee is pleased with the National Park Service's
    strategic plan for managing invasive non-native plants on
    National Park System lands and its aggressive efforts to
    eradicate non-native species. The Committee urges the Service
    to be pro-active in implementing its goal to provide park
    managers and the public with acceptable native alternatives to
    non-native plant materials and to increase public awareness of
    these issues. In implementing these goals, the Service should
    examine ways in which it can enhance habitat which benefits
    birds and pollinators. In particular, where it is appropriate,
    the Service should implement alternative regimens for mowing
    grass.
        The Committee recognizes the great value of Cumberland
    Island's rich and diverse cultural, natural, and historic
    resources and expects that this diversity be preserved in
    perpetuity. The Committee encourages the National Park Service
    to implement a balanced cultural, historic and wilderness
    management plan for Cumberland Island consistent with the
    Department of the Interior's mission statement, which is not
    intended to promote competition for resources among its various
    resource protection needs. This direction is consistent with
    the recent Memorandum of Agreement reached during the
    collaborative Cumberland Island stakeholders group meetings
    which included officials from the Department of the Interior,
    environmental groups, historic preservation groups and island
    residents. The Committee endorses this signed agreement and
    expects the Department to fulfill both the letter and the
    spirit of the agreement.
        The Committee is concerned that non-native species are
    causing serious damage to native plants and soils within the
    boundaries of the White Sands National Monument. The National
    Park Service needs to move expeditiously to come up with an
    environmentally sound plan to prevent further damage to the
    monument. Every available method should be considered to remove
    the non-native species from the monument site.
        The Committee requests a report from the National Park
    Service by April 1, 2000, on threats to the Carlsbad Caverns
    National Park that caused the recent Secretarial land
    withdrawal. The report should include steps that have been
    taken to implement the Cave Protection Act in the area
    surrounding the park boundaries. The Committee is especially
    interested in what steps the Department of the Interior took to
    seek input from local groups, elected officials, citizens and
    other interested parties before the decision was made.
        The Committee directs the Park Service to provide $200,000
    within existing funds to begin work on a Global Information
    System map network for the eight National Scenic Trails. At
    this time, most maps of these trails are on paper and vary
    widely in terms of accuracy. This presents difficulties in
    providing necessary information to trail managers, users and
    other stakeholders in trail development and enjoyment. The
    Committee recognizes the value of accurate, detailed mapping of
    trail routes, and supports development of this system to
    improve interpretation, maintenance, and development of the
    National Scenic Trails System.
        Within the increases provided above the Administration's
    request, the Service is directed to conduct a study on the
    historic and cultural significance of Lincoln Highway, the
    nation's first coast-to-coast paved roadway. The Congress
    doubled the amount available for the Service's Federal Lands
    Highway Program. Within those increases, the Service should
    continue its support for the New Found Gap Tunnel which is part
    of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park.
        Bill language has been included under General Provisions,
    Department of the Interior regarding grazing at the Lake
    Roosevelt National Recreation Area. The Committee wishes to
    reaffirm that beneficial uses at the Lake Roosevelt National
    Recreation Area include historical and traditional agriculture,
    grazing, recreation and cultural uses pursuant to a permit
    issued by the Service. Pursuant to the Lake Roosevelt National
    Recreation Area's new general management plan, existing and
    past historical use, and community moorage/public access
    facilities permitted by the Service at the Area may remain
    permitted under Service authority until it is determined by the
    Service that the permitted facility or activity is in conflict
    with a new or expanded concession facility at which time the
    Service may choose to terminate that specific permit.
        The Committee encourages Lake Roosevelt NRA to provide
    support to the Lake Roosevelt Forum for a broad based public
    education and outreach program which promotes balanced river
    and watershed management.
        The Northeast region is encouraged to provide technical
    assistance to interest groups and communities involved in the
    creation of a heritage area near Drake Well in Northeastern
    Pennsylvania.
        As proposed in the budget, the Committee has included an
    additional $1,312,000 in this bill which is dedicated to the
    upcoming bicentennial celebrations of the Lewis and Clark
    Expedition.
        Bill language is included under General Provisions,
    Department of the Interior, which renames the Steel Industry
    Heritage Area the ``Rivers of Steel National Heritage Area''.
        The following resource studies should be undertaken during
    fiscal year 2000: (1) Lowcountry Gullah Culture in South
    Carolina; (2) Revolutionary War sites in New Jersey; and (3)
    Loess Hills in Iowa.
        The Committee strongly encourages the Service to prepare a
    General Management Plan for the Lower East Side Tenement NHS.
        The Committee directs the Service to establish a citizens
    task force for the Jean Lafitte NHP&P whose specific purpose is
    to review the condition of, and make recommendations on
    suggested improvement to, the Chalmette Battlefield. The task
    force should be comprised of the park superintendent, St
    Bernard parish government, local officials, chamber of commerce
    officials, and the local tourism industry. The study should
    only consider federally owned buildings and artifacts within
    the boundary of the Jean Lafitte NHP&P. The task force should
    be mindful of the fact that Federal funds are limited and
    suggestions should address non-Federal cost sharing.
        The Committee is aware that the General Management Plan
    (GMP) for Morristown National Historical Park (NHP) has not
    been updated since 1976 causing delays in management decisions.
    Therefore, the Committee directs the National Park Service to
    update the GMP for Morristown NHP.
        Resource stewardship.--The Committee recommends
    $265,114,000 for resource stewardship, an increase of
    $36,295,000 above the enacted level and $1,661,000 below the
    request. Included in this amount are increases of $16,403,000
    for special need park operations, $8,000,000 for inventory and
    monitoring, $3,500,000 for natural resources preservation
    program, $4,000,000 for native and exotic species management,
    $735,000 for geologic programs, $500,000 to initiate the newly
    authorized Resource Protection Act, $1,000,000 for the cultural
    resources preservation program, $1,000,000 for the collection
    management program, $994,000 for Vanishing Treasures and
    $4,603,000 for uncontrollable expenses. The Committee
    cautiously accepts the $4,000,000 reduction for Everglades
    science and $440,000 for Presidio transition costs. The
    following requests were not provided and should not be made
    available from any other source: $2,021,000 for California
    Desert, $5,000,000 for America's Treasures On Line, and
    $499,000 for the South Florida Task Force.
        Visitor services.--The Committee recommends $320,558,000
    for visitor services, an increase of $19,320,000 above the
    enacted level and $752,000 above the request. Included in this
    amount above last year's levels are increases of $13,813,000
    for special need park operations, $800,000 for air tour
    overflight planning and management, $1,000,000 for the
    management of the recreation fee program and $6,997,000 for
    uncontrollable expenses. The Committee accepts the reduction of
    $3,290,000 for Presidio transition costs. The following
    requests were not provided and should not be made available
    from any other source: $150,000 for trails and rails
    partnership, $500,000 for a new conservation education program,
    and $150,000 for continuity of operations planning. The
    Committee does not agree to continue the entire one-time
    emergency supplemental funds provided last year.
        Maintenance.--The Committee recommends $442,881,000 for
    maintenance, an increase of $30,951,000 from the enacted level
    and $1,800,000 above the request. Included in this amount above
    last year's levels are increases of $11,379,000 for special
    need park operations, $4,000,000 for cyclic maintenance,
    $5,000,000 for repair/rehabilitation and $10,572,000 for
    uncontrollable expenses. The following requests were not
    provided and should not be made available from any other
    source: $2,500,000 for condition assessments and $1,000,000 for
    a new maintenance management system. Funds should be provided
    for necessary maintenance of the First Infantry Division
    Monument located near the White House. This monument is the
    property of the National Park Service. The Committee directs
    the Service to provide $40,000 to correct deficiencies at the
    Bell Haven Comfort Station along the George Washington Memorial
    Parkway.
        Park support.--The Committee recommends $248,895,000 for
    park support, an increase of $9,966,000 above the enacted level
    and a reduction of $2,985,000 below the request. Included in
    this amount are increases of $1,682,000 for special need park
    operations, $1,000,000 for partners for parks coordination and
    training, $1,000,000 for the challenge cost share program,
    $750,000 for financial system integration, $500,000 to upgrade
    budget formulation, $325,000 for information management system
    support, $150,000 for property management workforce training
    and $5,143,000 for uncontrollable expenses.
        The following requests were not provided and should not be
    made available from any other source: $1,981,000 for a new
    humanity for habitat program and expansion of the volunteers-
    in-parks program and $250,000 for workforce diversity plan
    implementation. The Committee accepts the reductions of
    $509,000 for Presidio transition costs and $75,000 for AFSII.
        The Committee expects the Service to continue to allocate
    one third of the funds provided for the challenge cost share
    program to the National trails system.
        The following two projects should be funded from within the
    increases the Committee has provided over the Administration's
    request: $150,000 for the Potomac Heritage National Scenic
    Trail and $150,000 for the section of the Trail of Tears which
    runs through Chattanooga, Tennessee. These amounts are intended
    to be provided as base funding and should be specifically noted
    in the fiscal year 2001 budget request.
        External administrative costs.--The Committee recommends
    $109,859,000 for external administrative costs, an increase of
    $5,171,000 above the enacted level and a reduction of $226,000
    below the request. Increases include $2,800,000 for GSA space
    rental and $2,371,000 for uncontrollable expenses.

                      National recreation and preservation

        The National recreation and preservation appropriation
    provides for the outdoor recreation planning, preservation of
    cultural and National heritage resources, technical assistance
    to Federal, State and local agencies, administration of
    Historic Preservation Fund grants and statutory and contractual
    aid.

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $46,225,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        48,336,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        45,449,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................          -776,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -2,887,000

        The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the
    budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

        The Committee affirms the importance and uniqueness of the
    National Park Service museum collections. Managed and
    interpreted in their original contexts, these objects,
    archives, and specimens are critical to our nation's ability to
    preserve and exhibit its cultural and natural heritage.
    Superintendents need to be mindful of their considerable
    responsibility in protecting and interpreting this resource.
        The Committee has a long-standing interest in the welfare
    of these collections, having designated funding specifically
    for their preservation, protection and cataloging since 1987.
    Included in the operations budget is an additional $1,000,000
    for this purpose. The Committee stresses the importance of
    ensuring that funds so designated continue to be used for their
    intended purpose. In addition, the National Park Service should
    continue to apply Recreation Fee Demonstration funds and other
    eligible funds, as appropriate, to addressing these needs.
        Recreation programs.--The Committee recommends $533,000, an
    increase of $18,000 above the enacted level and the same as the
    request. The increase is intended for fixed costs.
        Natural programs.--The Committee recommends $10,090,000, an
    increase of $1,002,000 above the enacted level and $2,750,000
    below the request. The increase includes $217,000 for fixed
    costs, $285,000 for hydropower relicensing assistance and
    $500,000 for the Rivers and Trails technical assistance
    program. The following request was not provided and should not
    be made available from any other sources: -$1,250,000 for a
    Chesapeake Bay Gateways and Watertrails initiative.
        Cultural programs.--The Committee recommends $19,364,000,
    an increase of $308,000 above the enacted level and a decrease
    of $800,000 below the request. The increase is provided for
    fixed costs. The Committee does not approve a new NHL theme
    studies program.
        International park affairs.--The Committee recommends
    $1,699,000, an increase of $28,000 above the enacted level and
    $150,000 below the request. The increase is provided for fixed
    costs. The Committee does not approve $150,000 for
    international leadership training. These funds should not be
    provided from any other source.
        Environmental and compliance review.--The Committee
    recommends $373,000, an increase of $15,000 above the enacted
    level and the same as the budget requests. The increase is
    provided for fixed costs.
        Grant administration.--The Committee recommends $1,819,000,
    an increase of $68,000 above the enacted level and the same as
    the budget request. The increase is provided for fixed costs.
        Statutory or contractual aid.--The Committee recommends
    $4,685,000, a decrease of $3,242,000 below the enacted level
    and $63,000 below the request.
        Heritage partnership programs.--The Committee recommends
    $6,886,000, an increase of $1,027,000 above the enacted level
    and $750,000 above the request. This amount includes an
    increase of $27,000 for fixed costs, and an increase of
    $1,000,000 for commissions and grants, which is $750,000 above
    the increase proposed in the budget. It is the intent of the
    Committee that the Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area
    be funded at a level of $1,000,000 as well as the Ohio and Erie
    Canal National Heritage Corridor, the Rivers of Steel National
    Heritage Area and the Essex National Heritage Area.
        The Committee directs the Service to provide a report in
    April of 2000 which describes the status of each project and
    the disbursal of Federal funds. Bill language is included under
    this section of the bill which limits overhead administrative
    expenses to $100,000. The Committee does not approve of the
    trend to increase overhead each year.
        Urban Parks and recreation fund.--The Committee did not
    provide the request of $4,000,000 for the Urban Parks Program.
    All increases are being focused on reducing the operational
    shortfalls and serious backlog maintenance for the National
    Park units.

                           historic preservation fund

        The Historic Preservation Fund supports the State historic
    preservation offices to perform a variety of functions,
    including: State management and administration of existing
    grant obligations, review and advice on Federal projects and
    actions, determinations, and nominations to the National
    Register, Tax Act certifications, and technical preservation
    services. The States also review properties within States to
    develop data for planning use.

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $72,412,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        80,512,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        46,712,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................       -25,700,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................       -33,800,000

        The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the
    budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

        The Committee recommends $46,712,000, which is $25,700,000
    below the enacted level and a reduction of $33,800,000 below
    the fiscal year 2000 budget request.
        This total amount includes an increase of $1,000,000 for
    the State Historic Preservation Offices, an increase of
    $3,300,000 for the Historically Black Colleges and Universities
    and level funding for the Tribal grants. No funding has been
    provided for a new National Historic Landmark Grants program.
        The increase provided for the Historically Black Colleges
    and Universities makes available $11,722,000 for fiscal year
    2000. This amount will enable the Park Service to complete the
    schools specifically earmarked in the 1996 Omnibus Parks Act.
    As in the past, the funds will require a 50 percent match of
    non-Federal funds. Within this total amount, $200,000 is for
    facility condition assessments.
        Although funding has not been provided at this time for the
    Millennium Initiative, the Committee feels that there is merit
    to providing a second and final year of funding for cultural
    backlog projects of the National Park Service and other
    agencies funded in this bill to celebrate the Millennium next
    year. The Committee will continue to keep this priority in mind
    as the bill progresses through the fiscal year 2000 process.
        Bill language is included under this account which makes
    available funds derived from providing review services
    associated with the historic preservation tax certification
    program. In addition, the Committee has amended Section 403(a)
    of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 which will
    permit the Service to move staff around the country to meet
    program needs.

                                  construction

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $239,738,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................       194,000,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................       169,856,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................       -69,882,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................       -24,144,000

        The Committee recommends the following distribution of
    funds:

            Project                                                   Amount
    Apostle Islands NL, WI (Meyers Beach)...................        $500,000
    Assateague Island NS, MD/VA (rehabilitation)............         973,000
    Badlands NP, SD (waste-water treatment facility)........       1,572,000
    Big Cypress NPre, FL (visitor facilities)...............       4,965,000
    Black Archives A&M, FL..................................       2,800,000
    Blackstone River Valley Heritage RI/MA (various)........       1,000,000
    Boston NHP, MA (rehabilitation).........................       1,049,000
    Brown vs. Board of Education NHS, KS (rehabilitation)...       6,335,000
    Castle Clinton NM, NY (rehabilitation)..................         460,000
    Colonial NHP, VA (water/sewer)..........................         714,000
    Cumberland Island NS, GA (rehabilitate--Plum Orchard)...       1,400,000
    Cuyahoga Valley NRA, OH (rehabilitation)................       4,000,000
    Dayton Aviation NHP, OH (Huffman Prairie/media/film)....         428,000
    Death Valley NP, CA (replace unsafe building)...........       6,335,000
    Delaware Water Gap NRA, NJ (Depew rec site).............         500,000
    Delaware Lehigh Heritage, PA (various)..................         500,000
    Edison NHS, NJ (rehabilitation).........................       3,032,000
    Everglades NP, FL (modified water delivery).............      20,000,000
    Everglades NP, FL (new waste-water plant)...............       1,288,000
    Florissant Fossil Beds NM, CO (protect resource)........       1,131,000
    Fort Stanwix NM, NY (rehabilitation)....................       2,500,000
    Gateway NRA, NJ (Sandy Hook utilities)..................       1,593,000
    George Washington Memorial Parkway, VA (Humpback Bridge)         500,000
    Gettysburg NMP, PA (utilities)..........................       1,100,000
    Glacier Bay NP&P, AK (rehabilitate sewer system)........       2,526,000
    Golden Gate NRA, CA (rehabilitation)....................       1,075,000
    Grand Canyon NP, AZ (rehabilitate water/sewer)..........         670,000
    Hot Springs NP, AR (rehabilitation).....................       1,000,000
    Indiana Dunes NL, IN (environmental education center)...         500,000
    Lake Mead NRA, NV (water treatment).....................       3,839,000
    National Underground R.R. Freedom Center................       1,000,000
    New Bedford Whaling NHP, MA (stabilization).............         800,000
    Olympic NP--Elwha, WA (water supply)....................       4,000,000
    Padre Island NS, TX (waste water treatment facility)....         823,000
    Perry's Victory & IPM, OH (rehabilitation)..............         200,000
    Sequoia & Kings Canyon NP, CA (rehabilitation)..........       5,621,000
    Sleeping Bear Dunes NL, MI (parking/restrooms)..........         800,000
    Southwest Penn. Heritage, PA (rehabilitation)...........       3,000,000
    Statue of Liberty NM & Ellis Island, NY/NJ
        (stabilization).....................................       1,000,000
    Timucuan Ecological & Historic Preserve, FL (boat docks)         550,000
    Tonto NM, AZ (restrooms/waste-water treatment)..........         703,000
    Wilson's Creek NB, MO (complete library)................         250,000
    Yellowstone NP, WY (waste-water treatment)..............       4,690,000
    Yosemite NP, CA (waste disposal)........................       1,850,000
                        --------------------------------------------------------
                        ____________________________________________________
          Project total.....................................      99,572,000
                        ========================================================
                        ____________________________________________________
    Emergency/unscheduled housing...........................      13,500,000
    Dam Safety..............................................       1,440,000
    Equipment Replacement...................................      15,000,000
    General Management Plans................................       7,724,000
    Special Resource Studies................................         825,000
    Construction Planning...................................      10,195,000
    Pre-Planning & Supp. Services...........................       4,500,000
    Construction Program Management.........................      17,100,000
                        --------------------------------------------------------
                        ____________________________________________________
          Subtotal..........................................      70,284,000
                        ========================================================
                        ____________________________________________________
          Grand Total.......................................     169,856,000

        The Committee recommends $169,856,000, a decrease of
    $69,882,000 below the enacted level and $24,144,000 below the
    request. The Committee commends the Park Service for its
    construction request this year which clearly focused on health
    and safety priorities. The Committee has funded 25 of 36
    projects recommended in the budget. It has not funded several
    projects which were not recommended through the Service's
    priority setting process and two projects that will not be able
    to expend the funds during the fiscal year.
        The Committee was shocked to see additional funding for the
    FDR Memorial located in Washington, D.C. included in the
    budget. The Committee had no idea that the Park Service or the
    Department was involved in discussions about expanding the new
    memorial. The Committee provided over $40,000,000 for this
    project which was completed last year. The Committee reminds
    the Service that not only did the private fundraising effort
    fall far short of its goals but that the former President
    requested that a memorial, if built, be no larger than his
    desk.
        The issue of whether FDR should be shown in a wheelchair
    has been exhaustively debated during the many years dedicated
    to planning and designing this memorial. For a private group to
    decide now, after the memorial is complete, that this statue is
    needed is problematic from a Federal funding perspective. The
    Committee does not take a position on the inclusion of a statue
    at this site. However, should it be decided by the appropriate
    authorities that such a statue would be appropriate, then non-
    Federal funds should pay for its construction, consistent with
    Public Law 105-29.
        The Committee notes that the Service has made good progress
    in implementing the construction reforms in the National
    Academy of Public Administration's report of last year
    including the significant reduction of in-house staff at the
    Denver Service Center. Full and successful implementation of
    this report should be one of the highest priorities of the
    National Park Service.
        Also included in the budget is $2,800,000 to complete the
    Federal share for the Center for Regional Black Culture at
    Florida A&M authorized in Public Law 105-138. The Committee
    recommends $1,000,000 for projects associated with the
    Blackstone River Valley Heritage Area and $714,000 for Colonial
    NHP for a one-time connection to local water and sewer lines.
        Included in the bill is $4,000,000 for continued
    rehabilitation projects at the Cuyahoga National Recreation
    Area and $428,000 for Dayton Aviation NHP for planning of the
    Huffman Prairie building and for media and educational
    programs. The Committee has included $500,000 for visitor
    enhancements at the Depew recreational site within the Delaware
    Water Gap National Recreation Area, and $500,000 for visitor
    access at Apostle Islands National Lakeshore.
        Also available is $500,000 for projects associated with the
    Delaware Lehigh National Heritage Area and $2,500,000 to
    complete the rehabilitation project at the Fort Stanwix NM. The
    Committee has included $500,000 for a temporary pedestrian
    bridge at Humpback Bridge along the George Washington Memorial
    Parkway. The current situation presents a clear danger to both
    pedestrians and bicycle users.
        Included is $1,000,000 to continue the rehabilitation of
    bathhouses at the Hot Springs NP and $500,000 to complete the
    existing environmental education center located at Indiana
    Dunes NL in Indiana. The Committee has provided $200,000 to
    complete the Perry's Victory and IPM and $800,000 is included
    for restrooms and additional parking in Sleeping Bear Dunes NL.
    The Committee has included $550,000 which will complete new
    docks at the Timucuan Ecological and Historic Preserve and
    $250,000 to be matched by private funds to complete a
    rehabilitation project at the Wilson's Creek NB. Also included
    is $1,000,000 for the National Underground R.R. Freedom Center
    in Cincinnati, Ohio. These funds are subject to a non-federal
    match and an authorization.
        Bill language is included under the construction account of
    the bill in addition to $1,850,000 provided for Yosemite
    National Park. The language permits the park to contribute 37
    percent of the estimated $5,000,000 cost of upgrading the local
    municipal solid waste disposal plant based on their use of the
    facility. While this action is highly unusual for the Committee
    to take, the Park Service assures the Committee that should the
    State close this facility for health violations, the park would
    incur a great deal more annually if it had to transport the
    park's trash to the nearest alternative facility.
        The Committee has included the $1,000,000 included in the
    budget to continue the ongoing stabilization work at Ellis
    Island. The Committee has also included bill language under the
    construction section of the bill which would allow the Park
    Service to retain 100 percent of its share of ferry revenue
    which has previously been unavailable for their use. This
    amount is approximately $6,000,000 annually. These funds must
    be spent for stabilization and rehabilitation and in fiscal
    year 2001 will be subject to a non-Federal match in order to
    maximize the funds.

                        Land and Water Conservation Fund

                                  (Rescission)

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      -$30,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................       -30,000,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................       -30,000,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        The Committee recommends the rescission of $30,000,000 in
    annual contract authority provided by 16 U.S.C. 460l-10a. This
    authority has not been used in years, and there are no plans to
    use it in fiscal year 2000.

                     land acquisition and state assistance

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $147,925,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................       172,468,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................       102,000,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................       -45,925,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................       -70,468,000

        The Committee recommends $102,000,000 for land acquisition,
    a decrease of $45,925,000 below the enacted level and
    $70,468,000 below the fiscal year 2000 budget request. This
    amount includes $88,800,000 for line item projects, $3,000,000
    for emergencies and hardships, $1,200,000 for inholdings and
    exchanges and $8,500,000 for acquisition management, and
    $500,000 for State grant administration.
        The Committee recommends the following distribution of
    funds:

                                                                   Committee
            Area and State                                    recommendation
    Antietam NB (MD)........................................      $2,000,000
    Apostle Islands NL (WI).................................         250,000
    Big Cypress NPre (FL)...................................      11,800,000
    Biscayne NP (FL)........................................         600,000
    Blue Ridge Parkway (NC/VA)..............................         225,000
    Boston Harbor Islands NRA (MA)..........................       2,000,000
    Cape Cod NS (MA)........................................       2,700,000
    Chesapeake & Ohio Canal NHP (MD)........................         800,000
    Cuyahoga Valley NRA (OH)................................       1,000,000
    Ebey's Landing NHR (WA).................................       1,000,000
    Everglades NP (FL)......................................      20,000,000
    Gettysburg NMP (PA).....................................       3,525,000
    Grants to State (FL)....................................      10,000,000
    Ice Age National Scenic Trail (WI)......................       2,000,000
    Indiana Dunes NL (IN)...................................       2,400,000
    Keweenaw NHP (MI).......................................       1,750,000
    Manassas NB (VA)........................................         400,000
    Martin Luther King Jr. NHS (GA).........................       5,000,000
    Monocacy NB (MD)........................................       1,500,000
    Olympic NP (WA).........................................       2,500,000
    Paoli Battlefield (PA)..................................       1,250,000
    Pecos NHP (NM)..........................................       1,800,000
    Prince William Forest Park (VA).........................       1,000,000
    Saguaro NP (AZ).........................................       2,800,000
    Santa Monica Mts. NRA (CA)..............................       2,000,000
    Stones River NB (TN)....................................       3,000,000
    Virgin Islands NP (St. John's) (VI).....................       3,000,000
    Weir Farm NHS (CT)......................................       2,500,000
                        --------------------------------------------------------
                        ____________________________________________________
          Subtotal..........................................      88,800,000
    Emergency & Hardship....................................       3,000,000
    Inholdings & Exchanges..................................       1,200,000
    Acquisition Management..................................       8,500,000
    State Grant Administration..............................         500,000
                        --------------------------------------------------------
                        ____________________________________________________
          Total.............................................     102,000,000

        The Committee has included $32,400,000 which will complete
    the purchase of land within the boundaries of the Everglades
    National Park, Big Cypress National Preserve and Biscayne
    National Park which are all considered a part of the South
    Florida Restoration Project. In addition, the Committee has
    included $10,000,000 for grants to the State of Florida to
    further this initiative subject to a fifty percent match of
    newly appropriated non-Federal funds. The Committee notes that
    as of June 1, 1999, $53,000,000 in Federal land acquisition
    funds for South Florida remains unobligated as well as
    $60,000,000 provided to the State of Florida for acquisitions.
    These new funds are also directly tied to a legislatively
    binding agreement between Federal and non-Federal partners
    which clearly sets out a guaranteed water supply to the
    National Parks and other natural areas including Florida Bay.
    Bill language is included under the land acquisition section of
    the bill.
        The Committee has provided $2,000,000 to help complete the
    Backbone Trail in the Santa Monica Mountains National
    Recreation Area contingent on an equal match from non-Federal
    sources specifically for the acquisition of the Backbone Trail.
    Also included in the bill is $2,000,000 to purchase the final
    island as part of the Boston Harbor Islands NRA in
    Massachusetts. This amount is contingent upon a $3,000,000
    match by the State.
        Funds provided for the Paoli Battlefield are contingent
    upon authorization and a fifty percent non-federal match.
        The Committee has included bill language under the land
    acquisition account which modifies the reprogramming guidelines
    to allow the acceptance of offers to sell for more than the
    appraised value for tracts with an appraised value of $50,000
    or less.

                        United States Geological Survey

        The United States Geological Survey was established by an
    act of Congress on March 3, 1879 to provide a permanent Federal
    agency to conduct the systematic and scientific
    ``classification of the public lands, and examination of the
    geological structure, mineral resources, and products of the
    National domain''. The USGS is the Federal Government's largest
    earth-science research agency, the Nation's largest civilian
    mapmaking agency, and the primary source of data on the
    Nation's surface and ground water resources. Its activities
    include conducting detailed assessments of the energy and
    mineral potential of the Nation's land and offshore areas;
    investigating and issuing warnings of earthquakes, volcanic
    eruptions, landslides, and other and hydrologic hazards;
    research on the geologic structure of the Nation; studies of
    the geologic features, structure, processes, and history of
    other planets of our solar system; topographic surveys of the
    Nation and preparation of topographic and thematic maps and
    related cartographic products; development and production of
    digital cartographic data bases and products; collection on a
    routine basis of data on the quantity, quality, and use of
    surface and ground water; research in hydraulics and hydrology;
    the coordination of all Federal water data acquisition; the
    scientific understanding and technologies needed to support the
    sound management and conservation of our Nation's biological
    resources; and the application of remotely sensed data to the
    development of new cartographic, geologic, and hydrologic
    research techniques for natural resources planning and
    management.

                     surveys, investigations, and research

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $798,896,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................       838,485,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................       820,444,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................       +21,548,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................       -18,041,000

        Over the past few budget cycles, the Committee has noted
    that the Survey's budget submissions have emphasized a number
    of new activities outside of the traditional mission of the
    Survey, and to the detriment of some of the long-standing core
    mission areas. These new programs have focused on topics such
    as: coordination of hazard information delivery, and real-time
    water quality data delivery. In the Committee's opinion, this
    ``initiative du jour'' approach to budgeting is having a
    negative impact on the Survey's ability to perform quality
    research in support of its basic mission, and has resulted in
    some glaring inconsistencies in policy.
        For example, in fiscal year 1999 funding for the
    Administration's Clean Water Action Plan was the Survey's
    highest priority, but in the 2000 budget submission the Survey
    proposed reductions to its clean water programs. At the same
    time, budgets for such traditional areas as: coastal and marine
    research, mineral resource surveys, cooperation with state
    water agencies, streamgauging, map production and revision, and
    studies of species and habitats have been proposed for
    decreases.
        The Committee is concerned about this apparent trend and
    directs that the Survey provide a statement defining the
    Survey's vision of its future role. This analysis should
    emphasize the major topical areas that are central to the
    Survey's mission and the types of activities that are needed to
    fulfill that mission. The Survey should comment on its role in
    collecting, managing, and disseminating long-term data sets for
    current and future management and understanding of the
    environment; its role in fundamental research to advance the
    understanding of processes; and its role in assessing the
    status and trends of hazards, resources and the environment.
    The Committee believes that the Survey's mission should
    continue to be a primary provider of scientific research, basic
    data, and assessments, and not shift its focus to becoming an
    information agency disseminating and coordinating the work of
    others.
        The Committee further directs the Survey to comment on the
    status of its investments in its long-term viability. These
    investments should include, at a minimum: (1) hiring of new
    staff to keep the agency current with emerging science and
    technology and building a group of experts who will carry
    forward the traditions of scientific excellence into the
    future; (2) ongoing training of existing staff to upgrade their
    knowledge and skills; (3) investments in new scientific
    instruments for field and laboratory work with improved
    accuracy or timeliness; (4) investment in facilities (new or
    renovated laboratories and offices); and (5) investments in
    information technology to enhance scientific computation and
    delivery of USGS data to users. The Survey should comment on
    recent trends in these investments and the potential impact
    that these levels of investment will have on the future ability
    of the Survey to carry out its mission. In its FY 2001 budget
    submission the Survey should comment on how the proposed budget
    serves to foster the mission of the Survey over the coming
    decades.
        The Committee does not approve the Survey's request to
    establish a new ``Integrated Science'' (place based and DOI
    science) budget activity, but does concur with the Survey's
    proposal for a new ``Science Support'' and ``Facilities''
    budget activity. The Committee believes that restructuring the
    budget is an iterative process and the decision not to
    establish an ``Integrated Science'' budget activity does not
    preclude the Survey from proposing future modifications to its
    budget structure. The Committee believes that the Survey did
    not adequately gather support for its budget restructuring
    proposals with its partners, and as a result the majority of
    comments from Survey partners were in opposition to the
    restructuring proposals.
        With respect to integrated science, the Committee believes
    that this is primarily a management issue and not a function of
    the structure of the budget. The Committee is dismayed to learn
    that the Survey does not currently engage in integrated
    science. Integrated science is not a new paradigm, and as such,
    the Survey should already be doing both coordinated and
    integrated science projects in support of Survey programs
    across its four divisions, with other Interior bureaus, and
    with other Federal agencies. The Committee is convinced that if
    the Survey's top leadership were committed to doing integrated
    science then any institutional barriers to integrated science
    would be easily overcome.
        The Committee recommends $820,444,000 for surveys,
    investigations, and research, an increase of $21,548,000 above
    the 1999 level and $18,041,000 below the budget request.
        The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the
    budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

        National mapping program.--The Committee recommends
    $127,610,000 for the national mapping program, a decrease of
    $7,824,000 below the budget request and a decrease of
    $10,705,000 below the 1999 level, including increases from the
    1999 level of $2,510,000 for fixed costs and $2,500,000 for
    data archiving, $450,000 for real time hazards, $500,000 for
    amphibian research, and $100,000 for hyperspectral remote
    sensing and synthetic aperture research in Yellowstone Park. As
    part of the Survey's budget restructuring proposal $9,050,000
    is transferred to the new science support activity and
    $7,715,000 is transferred to the new facilities activity.
    Within the recommendation the Committee has provided $3,000,000
    for the Gateway to the Future--Ohio pilot.
        The Committee has provided the additional $100,000 to
    support the use of NASA hyperspectral remote sensing and
    synthetic aperture radar for scientific research into riverine
    and riparian ecosystems in and around Yellowstone National
    Park.
        Geologic hazards, resources and processes.--The Committee
    recommends $210,081,000 for geologic hazards, resources, and
    processes, an increase of $11,464,000 above the budget request
    and a decrease of $29,069,000 below the 1999 level, including
    increases above the 1999 level of $5,384,000 for fixed costs,
    $2,400,000 for real time hazards ($400,000 for landslides,
    $1,600,000 for earthquakes, and $400,000 for geomagnetism), and
    $500,000 for coastal geology, and decreases of $2,000,000 for
    the minerals at risk program, and $250,000 for Hawaiian Volcano
    program. As part of the Surveys budget restructuring proposal
    $11,744,000 is transferred to the new science support activity
    and $23,359,000 is transferred to the new facilities activity.
        The Committee continues to believe that the Survey's
    highest hazards related priority should be to continue to
    upgrade its various hazards monitoring networks, to acquire
    quality hazards information, and to engage in quality research.
    As part of an overall funding strategy for the Survey, the
    Committee continues to support policies whose aim it is to
    provide quality information to as wide a range of users as
    possible. However, as noted earlier, given current funding
    constraints the Committee is convinced that the Survey should
    first invest in its core research programs. In this light, the
    Committee has provided funding for the Survey's ``Real Time
    Hazards'' initiative but does not agree to provide any
    resources for the Administration's proposed ``Disaster
    Information Network''.
        The Committee has provided the additional $500,000 to the
    Coastal Geology program to undertake a pilot project using the
    Light Distance and Ranging (LIDAR) technology to assist
    compliance with the listing of Chinook Salmon and Summer Chum
    Salmon under the Endangered Species Act. These funds should be
    used in cooperation with Kitsap County to map draining systems,
    stream systems, and to identify potentially unstable slopes.
    This information is important for restoring and maintaining
    healthy habitats for these threatened fish species.
        The Committee is concerned over the lack of attention given
    to the Survey's landslide program. Because of this concern, the
    Survey is directed to develop by September 15, 2000, a
    comprehensive strategy, including the estimated costs
    associated with addressing the widespread landslide hazards
    facing the Nation. The preparation of this strategy should
    include the involvement of all parties having responsibility
    for dealing with the problems associated with landslides.
        Water resources investigations.--The Committee recommends
    $185,301,000 for water resources assessments and research, an
    increase of $12,795,000 above the budget request and a decrease
    of $23,852,000 below the 1999 level, including increases from
    the 1999 level of $6,330,000 for fixed costs, $2,500,000 for
    real time hazards, and $500,000 for amphibian research, and
    decreases of $998,000 for watershed modeling, $250,000 for an
    endocrine disrupter study at Lake Mead and $100,000 for ground
    water monitoring in Hawaii. As part of the Survey's budget
    restructuring proposal $16,443,000 is transferred to the new
    science support activity and $15,391,000 is transferred to the
    new facilities activity.
        Biological research.--The Committee recommends $137,674,000
    for biological research an increase of $12,710,000 above the
    budget request and a decrease of $24,787,000 below the 1999
    level, including increases from the 1999 level of $3,757,000
    for fixed costs, $2,000,000 for amphibian research, and
    $1,000,000 for the cooperative research units, and decreases of
    $6,600,000 for the Alaska grant, $1,000,000 for the incinerator
    replacement, and a transfer of $300,000 for the San Marcos
    field station transfer to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
    As part of the Survey's budget restructuring proposal
    $8,605,000 is transferred to the new science support activity
    and $15,039,000 is transferred to the new facilities activity.
        The Committee understands that with the additional
    resources being provided in fiscal year 2000 the Survey can
    fill all of the remaining vacancies that exist at the
    cooperative research units. Therefore, the Committee directs
    the Survey to use these additional resources to fill as many
    existing positions as possible and in the shortest time
    practicable.
        The Committee encourages the experts at the USGS to begin
    discussions with the National Water Trust (Trust), a public-
    private consortium in Chattanooga, Tennessee, about the
    feasibility of the Trust acting as a regional coordinator for
    invasive species. It is the intention of the Trust to leverage
    private sector funding as a mechanism to address the serious
    problems of invasive species at a regional level. Within 6
    months of enactment of this Act the Survey should report back
    to the Committee about the feasibility of the Trust acting as a
    regional coordinator for information management, research, and
    the implementation of a coordinated invasive species strategy.
        Science support.--The Committee recommends $73,996,000 for
    science support, the same as the budget request and an increase
    of $46,688,000 above the 1999 level, including increases from
    the 1999 level of $1,547,000 for fixed costs, and a transfer of
    $45,141,000 which is a net of $701,000 transferred from the
    science support activity into the facilities activity. This is
    the first fiscal year in which all science support activities
    will be funded under one activity. The Committee has taken this
    action to ensure that the internal Survey policy of assessing
    each individual division is discontinued. This new budget
    structure insures both truth in budgeting, and also ensures
    that Survey partners will no longer be assessed for the total
    uncontrollable cost associated with a given research project.
        Facilities.--The Committee recommends $85,782,000 for
    facilities, an increase of $500,000 from the budget request and
    $64,273,000 above the 1999 level, including an increase from
    the 1999 level of $68,000 for fixed costs, $1,500,000 for
    backlog maintenance, $500,000 to address the deteriorating
    conditions at the Wellsboro lab, a transfer of $21,509,000 from
    the old facility activity, and a transfer of $62,205,000 which
    includes the transfer of $701,000 from science support to
    facilities. These are funds included in the old budget
    structure under general administration.

                          Minerals Management Service

        The Minerals Management Service is responsible for
    collecting, distributing, accounting and auditing revenues from
    mineral leases on Federal and Indian lands. In fiscal year
    2000, MMS expects to collect and distribute about $4 billion
    from more than 80,000 active Federal and Indian leases. In
    addition, about $75 million in unpaid and underpaid royalties
    are expected to be collected through the MMS audit and
    negotiated settlement programs.
        The MMS also manages the offshore energy and mineral
    resources on the Nation's Outer Continental Shelf. To date, the
    OCS program has been focused primarily on oil and gas leasing.
    Over the past few years, MMS has begun exploring the possible
    development of other marine mineral resources, especially sand
    and gravel.
        With the passage of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, MMS
    assumed increased responsibility for oil spill research,
    including the promotion of increased oil spill response
    capabilities, and for oil spill financial responsibility
    certifications of offshore platforms and pipelines.

                    royalty and offshore minerals management

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $117,902,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................       110,082,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................       110,082,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................        -7,820,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the
    budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

        The Committee recommends $110,082,000 for royalty and
    offshore minerals management, the same as the budget request
    and $7,820,000 below the 1999 level. The Committee
    recommendation includes an overall decrease in appropriated
    funds which is being offset by the use of an additional
    $24,000,000 in excess receipts in the OCS lands activity.
        The Committee included an increase of $5,000,000 to
    continue development and implementation of the Royalty
    Management Program reengineering project. This is the second
    phase of a multi-year effort that will provide benefits to the
    Federal government, states, and Indian tribes through reduced
    program costs and improved program operations. In addition, the
    simplified reporting schemes envisioned in the reengineering
    effort are expected to save the minerals industry millions of
    dollars through reduced reporting burden.
        The Committee expects the Service to work with the Center
    for Marine Resources and Environmental Technology at the
    University of Mississippi to determine the extent to which the
    Center's expertise could assist in resource assessments
    relating to potential hydrate production in Federal waters. The
    Service should coordinate with the U.S. Geological Survey and
    the Department of Energy's Office of Fossil Energy Research and
    Development with respect to using the Center's expertise in
    this area.
        Bill language.--Bill language has been included under
    General Provisions, Department of the Interior to prohibit the
    use of funds for Outer Continental Shelf leasing activities in
    several areas. The leasing restrictions included for fiscal
    year 2000 are the same as those in previous fiscal years. The
    Administration has supported continuing these provisions for
    another year, while updating the language to conform to the
    current five-year plan. The areas covered by the Committee's
    recommendation include Northern, Central and Southern
    California, the North Atlantic, Washington-Oregon, Florida, the
    Mid and South Atlantic, and the North Aleutian Basin in Alaska.
    The revision proposed by the Administration, and included by
    the Committee, reflects the inclusion in the five-year plan of
    a sale in a small area offshore Florida and Alabama that was
    previously under moratoria. Language is also included ensuring
    that the full amount of excess receipts will be available.

                               Oil Spill Research

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................        $6,118,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................         6,118,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................         6,118,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        The Committee recommends $6,118,000, to be derived from the
    Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, to conduct oil spill research
    and financial responsibility and inspection activities
    associated with the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, Public Law 101-
    380. The Committee recommendation is equal to the budget
    request.

              Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement

        The Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement
    (OSM), through its regulation and technology account, regulates
    surface coal mining operations to ensure that the environment
    is protected during those operations and that the land is
    adequately reclaimed once mining is completed. The OSM
    accomplishes this mission by providing grants to those States
    that maintain their own regulatory and reclamation programs and
    by conducting oversight of State programs. Further, the OSM
    administers the regulatory programs in the States that do not
    have their own programs and on Federal and tribal lands.
        Through its abandoned mine land (AML) reclamation fund
    account, the OSM provides environmental restoration at
    abandoned coal mines using tonnage-based fees collected from
    current coal production operations. In their unreclaimed
    condition these abandoned sites may endanger public health and
    safety or prevent the beneficial use of land and water
    resources.

                           regulation and technology

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................        93,078,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        94,391,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        95,693,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................        +2,615,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................        +1,302,000

        The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the
    budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

        The Committee recommends $95,693,000 for Regulation and
    technology, an increase of $1,302,000 above the request and
    $2,615,000 above the 1999 level. The increased funding should
    cover the OSM fixed cost increases. The Committee has also
    added $1,500,000 to the environmental protection activity by
    transferring $1,000,000 from the AML clean streams cooperative
    agreement program and $500,000 from the AML fee compliance
    program. This transfer will help the States and Tribes meet
    their increased demand and workload requirements as well as
    State uncontrollable fixed costs relating to State and Tribal
    regulatory grants. The increase to the State regulatory grant
    program brings the funding for that activity to $52,200,000.

                        abandoned mine reclamation fund

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $185,416,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................       211,158,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................       196,458,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................       +11,042,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................       -14,700,000

        The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the
    budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

        The Committee recommends $196,458,000 for the Abandoned
    Mine Reclamation fund, $14,700,000 below the request and an
    increase of $11,042,000 above the 1999 level. The Committee
    recognizes the great amount of reclamation work that remains to
    be done, as well as some of the terrible health, safety and
    environmental problems caused by this situation. The Committee
    has provided a substantial increase to this program, and has
    increased the authority for the Appalachian Clean Streams
    Initiative to a total of $8,000,000. The increased funding
    should cover the OSM fixed cost increases. The Committee has
    not approved the Administration's request to insert bill
    language altering the formula for distributing the increased
    funding provided for AML activities. In order to assist the
    State regulatory programs which have had static funding for
    several years, the Committee has transferred $1,000,000 from
    the environmental restoration activity and $500,000 from the
    fee compliance portion of the financial management activity to
    the regulation and technology appropriation. The Committee has
    also added $300,000 in new funds above the 1999 level to
    provide a grant specifically for the purpose of conducting a
    demonstration project in western Pennsylvania to determine the
    efficacy of improving water quality by removing metals from
    eligible waters polluted by acid mine drainage.

                            Bureau of Indian Affairs

        The Bureau of Indian Affairs was created in 1824; its
    mission is founded on a government-to-government relationship
    and trust responsibility that results from treaties with Native
    groups. The Bureau delivers services to over one million Native
    Americans through 12 area offices and 83 agency offices. In
    addition, the Bureau provides education programs to Native
    Americans through the operation of 118 day schools, 48 boarding
    schools, and 14 dormitories. Lastly, the Bureau administers
    more than 46 million acres of tribally owned land.

                          operation of indian programs

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................    $1,584,124,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................     1,694,387,000
    Recommended, 1999.....................................     1,631,050,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................       +46,926,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................       -63,337,000

        The Committee recommends $1,631,050,000 for the operation
    of Indian programs, an increase of $46,926,000 above the fiscal
    year 1999 level and a decrease of $63,337,000 from the budget
    estimate. The Committee agrees to all internal transfers and
    budget structure changes proposed by the BIA in the budget
    request. As a result of significant budgetary constraints
    arising from the balanced budget agreement limited funding has
    been provided to address the Bureau's uncontrollable cost
    increases to provide the same level of services to the tribes
    as that provided during fiscal year 1999. In addition to
    uncontrollable cost increases, the Committee has provided
    limited funding increases for priority programs. The Committee
    has taken this action so as to provide enough room in the
    budget to fund fully the Administration's request to fix the
    long-standing problems associated with management of the Indian
    trust funds. The Committee is convinced that for the first time
    there exists a nexus between the Administration, the Department
    of the Interior, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and the Congress
    to implement fully the High Level Implementation Plan and put
    in place the necessary accounting systems, records management,
    people, and training to provide Indian account holders with
    accurate statements of their resources.
        The Committee did not provide any funds for the
    Administration's school bonding initiative. The Committee notes
    that before any money can be provided for this new program, the
    legislative Committees of jurisdiction in the House and Senate
    need to first enact the tax credit portion of the initiative.
    Without the tax provisions, tribes have no authority to issue
    these types of school bonds. At such time as the tax provisions
    are enacted into law, the Committee will reconsider its
    decision not to provide funding for the school bonding
    initiative.
        The Committee has made a number of changes to the Operation
    of Indian Programs (OIP) account bill language. These changes
    are not meant to signal a reduction in the number of programs
    in OIP, nor are they meant to limit the types of programs
    within OIP. The Committee's intent is simply to condense the
    language.
        The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the
    budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

        Tribal priority allocations.--The Committee recommends
    $698,395,000 for tribal priority allocations, a decrease of
    $17,780,000 below the budget request and a decrease of $649,000
    below the 1999 level, including increases above the 1999 level
    of $13,661,000 for fixed costs and $5,000,000 for the Indian
    Self-Determination Fund, and decreases of $120,000 for employee
    displacement costs and $19,190,000 resulting from internal
    transfers.
        The Committee has concerns about reprogramming and transfer
    actions that would frustrate the Committee's support for trust
    system improvements. Therefore, real estate services and real
    estate appraisal funds within Tribal Priority Allocations are
    not to be reprogrammed without Committee approval. Further,
    probate backlog reduction funds within Non-recurring Programs
    and land records improvement funds within Area Office
    Operations are not available for transfer into the base budget
    of any tribe.
        The Committee established the BIA/Tribal Priority
    Allocations (TPA) work group to analyze the distribution of TPA
    funds and to develop a new distribution method if warranted.
    The work group was directed also to analyze and develop a
    methodology for measuring tribal needs on a program-by-program
    basis. The Committee has not as yet received the TPA report,
    but has received a separate tribal report. If the tribes did
    not agree with the Bureau's analysis and recommendations they
    could have written a minority opinion as an addendum to the
    official report. However, when resources were provided for this
    effort, the Committee did not envision that Federal funds would
    be allocated to the tribal representatives of the work group so
    that they could develop their own study.
        The Committee believes that this was an unwarranted use of
    these funds, and expects the Bureau to maintain tighter control
    and oversight in the future. The Committee believes that tribal
    participation in these efforts is concluded, but what this
    process has shown is that the Bureau needs to provide better
    and faster responses to this Committee and other Committees of
    the Congress. Therefore, $250,000 provided under TPA is
    specifically identified for the establishment of an office of
    policy analysis and planning in support of program reform
    efforts, and to provide more timely response to the Congress
    where policy analysis is needed. Within 60 days of enactment of
    this Act, the Bureau is to provide to the Committee an
    assessment of its most pressing policy issues and a work plan
    detailing what specific projects the Bureau will undertake
    during fiscal year 2000.
        Other recurring programs.--The Committee recommends
    $559,554,000 for other recurring programs, a decrease of
    $20,642,000 from the budget request and an increase of
    $17,515,000 above the 1999 level, including increases from the
    1999 level of $8,378,000 for fixed costs, $5,000,000 for Indian
    School Equalization Program (ISEP) funds, $1,000,000 for the
    Tribally Controlled Community Colleges, $3,062,000 for the
    timber-fish-wildlife project in Washington State. This increase
    provides a total program level of $4,000,000, and $75,000
    resulting from internal transfers.
        Non-recurring programs.--The Committee recommends
    $65,206,000 for non-recurring programs, a decrease of
    $5,984,000 from the budget request and an increase of
    $1,056,000 above the 1999 level, including increases from the
    1999 level of $737,000 for fixed costs, $592,000 for Gila River
    Farms, and $100,000 for the Lake Roosevelt Council, and
    decreases of $100,000 for the St. Augustine Center and $273,000
    resulting from internal transfers.
        Within the $3,000,000 provided for the ``jobs in the
    woods'' initiative, $400,000 should continue to be used by the
    Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission for the Wildstock
    Restoration Initiative.
        Central office operations.--The Committee recommends
    $47,750,000 for central office operations, the same as the
    budget request and an increase of $2,011,000 above the 1999
    level, including increases from the 1999 level of $1,019,000
    for fixed costs, $592,000 resulting from internal transfers,
    and $400,000 to establish a coordinating office for alcohol and
    substance abuse.
        Area office operations.--The Committee recommends
    $43,938,000 for area office operations, an increase of
    $1,495,000 above the budget request and an increase of $998,000
    above the 1999 level, including an increase from the 1999 level
    of $1,457,000 for fixed costs and a decrease of $459,000
    resulting from internal transfers.
        Special programs and pooled overhead.--The Committee
    recommends $216,243,000 for special programs and pooled
    overhead, a decrease of $20,426,000 below the budget request
    and an increase of $25,995,000 above the 1999 level, including
    increases from the 1999 level of $6,740,000 for fixed costs and
    $19,255,000 resulting from internal transfers.
        Within the funds provided for special programs and pooled
    overhead, $108,000 is provided for the United Sioux Tribe
    Development Corporation, $524,000 for the National Ironworkers
    Training Program, and $100,000 for the continuation of the
    Cooperative Distance Learning Telecommunications project with
    the Southwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute and Lockheed
    Martin Corporation.
        In fiscal year 2000, the Bureau should continue to pay for
    and provide for current levels of service to the Office of
    Special Trustee (OST) for Information Resource Management
    systems and other contractual costs to support existing
    mainframe computers, licenses, and other costs similar to
    previous years. The Committee recognizes that BIA's IRM
    resources are limited and that system enhancements may be
    needed by both BIA and OST trust systems. The Committee expects
    that investments in information technology will be implemented
    in a coordinated and cost effective manner that ensures no
    duplication of resources between BIA and OST, particularly in
    the area of telecommunications.
        Bill language.--Bill language has been included under the
    Bureau's Administrative Provisions to allow tribes to return
    their appropriated funds to the Bureau for redistribution;
    while not limiting the ability of a tribe to seek future
    funding. Bill language has also been included under General
    Provisions, Department of the Interior which makes permanent
    the provision that limits payment of contract support costs to
    contracts under the jurisdiction of the Department.
        Bill language is included under Department of the Interior
    General Provisions, to allow the Department to appoint
    Administrative Law Judges for time-limited appointments in
    order to reduce and eventually eliminate the backlog of Indian
    probate cases. Currently, the Department has in excess 7,000
    cases to be probated. This flexibility will allow for the
    hiring of experienced attorneys on a part time basis, temporary
    or other appointment status to meet the challenges of
    eliminating the probate backlog.
        The Department and the Bureau are to be commended for
    aggressively reviewing the current procedures for adjudicating
    Indian probate cases. The Committee expects the results of that
    review to result in streamlined procedures, and if necessary,
    substantive legislative changes.

                                  construction

    Appropriation enacted, 1999.............................    $123,421,000
    Budget estimate, 2000...................................     174,258,000
    Recommended, 2000.......................................     126,023,000
        Comparison:.........................................
        Appropriation, 1999.................................      +2,602,000
        Budget estimate, 2000...............................     -48,235,000

        The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the
    budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

        Education.--The Committee recommends $60,503,000 for
    education construction a decrease of $47,874,000 below the
    budget request and an increase of $103,000 above the 1999 level
    for fixed costs. This funding level provides $17,485,000 to
    begin construction of the Seba Dalkai Boarding School and the
    Shiprock Alternative School which are the next two schools on
    the priority list. The Bureau should report back to the
    Committee as soon as practicable with its recommendation on how
    these funds should be allocated. Even though the Administration
    has a policy of funding the total cost of a school construction
    in the year the project is being proposed, the Committee is
    concerned that this policy results in schools being funded out
    of order with the Bureau's own school construction priority
    list. The Committee believes that the Administration needs to
    be more sensitive to those tribes who have waited years until
    their school is next on the priority list and those tribes who
    are still waiting to get on the priority list. The Committee
    does not agree with the Bureau's request to reduce the FI&R
    funding level by $4,000,000. Given the significant maintenance
    backlog in the Bureau's school system the Committee has
    restored this proposed cut.
        The Committee has continued bill language carried since
    fiscal year 1995 related to implementing the process to award
    grants for construction of new schools or facilities
    improvement and repair projects in excess of $100,000. The
    language ensures that the Department can continue to implement
    the grant process while the permanent implementation process is
    under development in fiscal year 2000.
        The Committee expects the Department and the Bureau of
    Indian Affairs to continue to work cooperatively with the
    tribes in the development of a final implementation process.
    Given that the language is clear concerning negotiating the
    schedule of payments, the Committee has not continued the
    language limiting payments to two per year.
        The Committee has been advised that the Bureau of Indian
    Affairs, the Department of Justice, the Puyallup tribe, and the
    Chief Leschi school have reached a settlement on overpayment of
    Chief Leschi school expenses. Collection of these overpayments
    will occur over the next several years and the Committee
    expects that these funds be used to support school
    construction.
        Public safety and justice.--The Committee recommends
    $5,564,000 for public safety and justice, the same as the
    budget request and an increase above the 1999 level of $14,000
    for fixed costs.
        Resources management.--The Committee recommends $51,823,000
    for resources management, the same as the budget request and an
    increase of $2,203,000 above the 1999 level, including
    increases from the 1999 level of $190,000 for fixed costs and
    $2,013,000 for the safety of dams program.
        General administration.--The Committee recommends
    $8,133,000 for general administration and construction
    management, a decrease of $361,000 below the budget request and
    an increase of $282,000 above the 1999 level for fixed costs.

     indian land and water claim settlements and miscellaneous payments to
                                    indians

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $28,882,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        28,401,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        25,901,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................        -2,981,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -2,500,000

        The Committee recommends $25,901,000 for Indian land and
    water claim settlements and miscellaneous payments to Indians,
    a decrease of $2,500,000 from the budget request and a decrease
    of $2,981,000, from the 1999 level. The Committee
    recommendation includes $625,000 for White Earth, $246,000 for
    Hoopa-Yurok, $25,000,000 for the Ute settlement, and $30,000
    for Pyramid Lake.

                     indian guaranteed loan program account

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................        $5,001,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................         5,008,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................         5,008,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................            +7,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        The Committee recommends $5,008,000 for the Indian
    guaranteed loan program the same as the budget request and an
    increase of $7,000 from the 1999 level.

                        indian land consolidation pilot

        This account was funded in fiscal year 1999 under the
    Bureau of Indian Affairs but, to consolidate all trust reform
    activities, it is moved to the Office of Special Trustee for
    American Indians for fiscal year 2000.

                              Departmental Offices

                                Insular Affairs

                           assistance to territories

        The Office of Insular Affairs (OIA) was established on
    August 4, 1995 through Secretarial Order No. 3191 which also
    abolished the former Office of Territorial and International
    Affairs. The OIA has important responsibilities to help the
    United States government fulfill its responsibilities to the
    four U.S. territories of Guam, American Samoa, U.S. Virgin
    Islands and the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands
    (CNMI) and also the three freely associated States: the
    Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), the Republic of the
    Marshall Islands (RMA) and the Republic of Palau. The permanent
    and trust fund payments to the territories and the compact
    nations provide substantial financial resources to these
    governments.

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $66,175,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        68,075,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        66,320,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................          +145,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -1,755,000

        The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the
    budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

        Territorial Assistance.--The Committee recommends
    $15,546,000, which is $1,755,000 below the request and $145,000
    above the 1999 level. The Committee continues to feel that the
    small, focused grants awarded through the technical assistance
    program are some of the most cost effective ways of helping the
    territories and freely associated states. The Committee is
    encouraged by work on the brown tree snake, and has maintained
    the increases provided in each of the past two years. The
    Committee has not been adequately informed about the role of
    the Department and the OIA in the new coral reef initiative.
    The Committee will wait to fund this new work until a clear
    package is developed which clarifies various Federal agency
    roles, including the Department of the Interior, and the
    territorial governments and the governments of the freely
    associated states.
        American Samoa.--The Committee recommends $23,054,000,
    which is equal to the request and the 1999 level for operations
    grants. The Committee remains very concerned about continuing
    fiscal problems in American Samoa. The Committee will wait on
    innovative funding schemes for the American Samoa government
    until it takes more decisive action to control its costs and
    payroll, and enhance its revenues in accordance with the
    previous recommendations from the joint working group and any
    new financial recovery plan that may be developed.
        Guam.--The Committee notes the $4,580,000 payment to Guam
    using Covenant grant funds is to address the impact resulting
    from the implementation of the compact of Free Association.
        Northern Mariana Islands/Covenant grants.--The Committee
    recommends $27,720,000, which is equal to the request and the
    1999 level for CNMI covenant grants. The Committee remains very
    concerned about the labor and immigration situation in the
    CNMI. The Committee will be working with the GAO as it
    evaluates the CNMI economy as directed by the Committee last
    year. The Committee is encouraged by the very recent efforts of
    the CNMI to implement the capital improvement program. The
    Committee has deferred $5,000,000 for CNMI construction by
    extending the terms of Public Law 94-241 relative to CNMI an
    additional year so that this amount will be provided to CNMI in
    fiscal year 2003. At the rate that CNMI is obligating
    construction grants, a reduction of this amount in the current
    fiscal year should have no harmful impacts on its construction
    plans. CNMI payments for fiscal years 2001 and 2002 shall
    remain at $11,000,000. However, if the CNMI does not make
    progress on its capital investments, as well as its labor and
    immigration problems, the Committee may revisit these fund
    distributions in the future.
        The Committee has provided bill language to redirect this
    $5,000,000 in mandatory funding during fiscal year 2000 for
    additional compact assistance for Guam.

                          compact of free association

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $20,930,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        20,545,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        20,545,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................          -385,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the
    budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

        The Committee recommends $20,545,000, which is the same as
    the request and $385,000 below the 1999 level. The Committee
    has reduced the Enewetak support payment as requested by the
    Administration.

                            Departmental Management

                             salaries and expenses

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $64,686,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        63,064,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        62,864,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................        -1,822,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................          -200,000

        The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the
    budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

        The Committee recommends $62,864,000 for fiscal year 2000,
    $1,822,000 below the enacted level and $200,000 below the
    fiscal year 2000 request. The Committee has urged the
    Department to reduce unnecessary administrative practices that
    consume a large amount of staff time such as chain of review,
    concurrence and sign-offs for correspondence and for
    programmatic documents. The Committee understands that many of
    these old and cumbersome practices continue.
        The Committee expects that, as levels of review are reduced
    and employees are empowered to do their jobs, many positions
    will be eliminated. These positions should not be converted
    into additional program staff but should truly result in a
    reduction of FTEs. This reduction should be a direct result of
    improved management decisions. The Committee is aware that the
    Departmental Management staff is augmented with personnel
    details from other bureau offices.

                            Office of the Solicitor

                             salaries and expenses

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $36,784,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        41,500,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        36,784,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -4,716,000

        The Committee recommends $36,784,000 for fiscal year 2000,
    the same as the enacted level.

                          Office of Inspector General

                             salaries and expenses

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $25,486,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        27,614,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        26,086,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................          +600,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -1,528,000

        The Committee recommends $26,086,000, $600,000 above the
    enacted level and $1,528,000 below the fiscal year 2000
    request. The increase above the 1999 level is for fixed costs.

                 Office of Special Trustee for American Indians

                             Federal trust programs

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $61,299,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        90,025,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        90,025,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................       +28,726,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        The Committee recommends $90,025,000 for the Office of the
    Special Trustee for American Indians an increase of $28,726,000
    above the 1999 level and the same as the budget request. The
    Committee has provided $1,663,000 for Executive Direction and
    $88,362,000 for Program Operations, Support and Improvements.
        In oversight hearings before this Committee, both the
    Secretary of the Interior and the Assistant Secretary for
    Indian Affairs stated that fixing the problems associated with
    management of the Indian trust fund systems were their highest
    priorities, and that, if necessary, they would forgo funding
    for other priority items in their budget to see adequate
    funding provided for implementation of the High Level
    Implementation Plan.
        The problems of Indian trust fund management are long-
    standing and enormously complex, and, as GAO reported in 1994,
    their resolution requires a sustained commitment of both
    Congress and the Administration. The Committee is convinced
    that for the first time a real nexus exists between the Bureau
    of Indian Affairs, The Office of Special Trustee for American
    Indians, the Department of the Interior, and the Congress to
    put in place the necessary accounting systems, records
    management, people, and training to implement fully the High
    Level Implementation Plan to provide Indian account holders
    with accurate statements of their resources.
        This Committee has been actively involved in oversight of
    trust reform since the 1980s, and believes the commitment and
    leadership currently in place is unprecedented, and represents
    a unique opportunity to resolve long-standing Indian trust
    management problems. Because the learning curve for trust
    reform is so steep, the Committee believes that the prospects
    of trust reform would be diminished if reforms are
    significantly delayed beyond 2000 and hence has provided the
    full amount as requested by the Administration.
        Bill language has been included allowing the transfer of
    funds to Departmental Management. The Committee understands
    that any such transfer of funds will be used by the Office of
    Hearings and Appeals to reduce the Bureau of Indian Affairs
    probate backlog. While the Committee supports such efforts, it
    nevertheless directs that any such transfers be submitted to
    the Committee for its approval under the established
    reprogramming procedures.

                        indian land consolidation pilot

                           Indian Land Consolidation

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................        $5,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        10,000,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................         5,000,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -5,000,000

        The Committee recommends $5,000,000 for the Indian land
    consolidation pilot, the same as the 1999 level and a decrease
    of $5,000,000 below the budget request.

               Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration

                    natural resource damage assessment fund

        The purpose of the Natural Resource Damage Assessment Fund
    is to provide the basis for claims against responsible parties
    for the restoration of injured natural resources. Assessments
    ultimately will lead to the restoration of injured resources
    and reimbursement for reasonable assessment costs from
    responsible parties through negotiated settlements or other
    legal actions.
        This account, prior to fiscal year 1999, was included under
    the United States Fish and Wildlife Service appropriation. The
    account was moved to the Departmental Offices appropriation
    because its functions relate to several different bureaus
    within the Department of the Interior.

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................        $4,492,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................         7,900,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................         5,400,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................          +908,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -2,500,000

        The Committee recommends $5,400,000 for the natural
    resource damage assessment fund, a decrease of $2,500,000 below
    the budget request and an increase of $908,000 above the fiscal
    year 1999 level. Decreases below the budget request include
    $2,175,000 in damage assessments and $325,000 in program
    management.

                 general provisions, department of the interior

        The Committee recommends continuing several provisions
    carried in previous bills as follows. Sections 101 and 102
    provide for emergency transfer authority with the approval of
    the Secretary. Section 103 provides for warehouse and garage
    operations and for reimbursement for those services. Section
    104 provides for vehicle and other services. Section 105
    provides for uniform allowances. Section 106 provides for
    twelve month contracts.
        Section 107 prohibits the expenditure of funds for Outer
    Continental Shelf leasing activities in certain areas as
    proposed in the budget. These provisions are addressed under
    the Minerals Management Service in this report.
        Section 108 limits the investment of Federal funds by
    tribes and tribal organizations to obligations of the United
    States or obligations insured by the United States.
        Section 109 provides authority through fiscal year 2002 for
    lump sum payments of severance pay and continued health
    benefits to Federal Helium Operations employees who have been
    separated as a result of the closure of the helium program.
        Section 110 makes permanent a limitation on the payment of
    contract support costs for certain Indian contracts, using
    funding in this title, to contracts under the jurisdiction of
    agencies of the Department of the Interior.
        Section 111 prohibits the National Park Service from
    reducing recreation fees for non-local travel through any park
    unit.
        Section 112 provides permanent authority to the Secretary
    to lease space to non-Federal entities and to collect and
    retain fees for the Working Capital Fund.
        Section 113 changes the name of the Steel Industry American
    Heritage Area to the ``Rivers of Steel National Heritage
    Area''.
        Section 114 permits the retention of rebates from credit
    card services for deposit to the Departmental Working Capital
    Fund.
        Section 115 permits the transfer of funds between the
    Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Office of Special Trustee for
    American Indians for the Trust Management Improvement Project
    High Level Implementation Plan.
        Section 116 exempts properties at the Fort Baker, Golden
    Gate National Recreation Area from certain taxes and special
    assessments.
        Section 117 permits the retention of proceeds from
    agreements and leases at the Fort Baker, Golden Gate National
    Recreation Area for preservation, restoration, operation,
    maintenance, interpretation and related activities.
        Section 118 requires the renewal of grazing permits in the
    Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area and directs the
    National Park Service to manage grazing use to protect
    recreational, natural and cultural resources.
        Section 119 requires the renewal of grazing permits by the
    Bureau of Land Management while the Bureau completes on-site
    environmental assessments.
        Section 120 allows for the hiring of administrative law
    judges to address the Indian probate backlog.

                           TITLE II--RELATED AGENCIES

                           DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

                                 Forest Service

        The U.S. Forest Service manages 192 million acres of public
    lands for multiple use Nationwide, including lands in 44
    States, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. The Forest Service
    administers a wide variety of programs, including forest and
    rangeland research, State and private forestry assistance,
    wildfire suppression and fuels reduction, cooperative forest
    health programs, and human resource programs. The National
    Forest System (NFS) includes 156 National forests, 20 National
    grasslands, a National tallgrass prairie, 4 National monuments,
    and 9 land utilization projects. The NFS is managed for
    multiple use, including timber production, recreation,
    wilderness, minerals, grazing, fish and wildlife habitat
    management, and soil and water conservation.
        The Committee remains concerned about the management
    accountability and performance of the Forest Service and the
    Department of Agriculture. The Committee is concerned that fund
    transfers to the Department of Agriculture have not been a
    predictable and transparent part of the budgeting process. Far
    too much funding, with little Congressional control or
    knowledge, has been transferred for administrative functions of
    the Department that perhaps should be funded with the normal
    Department of Agriculture appropriations. The Committee is
    concerned that the Department may not be fully implementing the
    provision included in previous appropriations acts that
    requires repayment for detailees used for more than 30 days.
    The Committee has required Congressional approval before any
    funds may be transferred for the working capital fund. The
    Department and the Forest Service may be duplicating accounting
    management functions and unduly increasing staffing at
    headquarters to the detriment of on-the-ground management. The
    Committee will continue to monitor closely and control these
    administrative functions until and unless the Department of
    Agriculture and the Forest Service offer more clear and cost-
    efficient management.
        The accountability problems of the Forest Service are much
    more of a problem than just bad accounting. The Committee notes
    that performance measures and their use in management are
    under-utilized by Forest Service leaders. The Committee also
    finds the accountability problem troubling as it relates to
    Congressional direction, in either the bill or report. The
    Committee believes that this problem can be directly
    attributable to a lack of leadership on the part of both the
    Forest Service and the Department of Agriculture. When
    Congressional instructions are provided the Committee expects
    these instructions to be closely monitored and followed. In the
    future, the Committee directs that earmarks for Congressional
    funding priorities be first allocated to the receiving units,
    and then the remaining funds should be allocated to the field
    or management unit based on established Forest Service
    procedures. Field units or programs should not have their
    allocations reduced because of earmarks for Congressional
    priorities. The Committee is prepared to provide bill language
    that provides detailed funding instructions for every dollar in
    the Forest Service budget should these instructions be ignored.
        The Committee has made several changes to enhance
    accountability and increase Congressional involvement with
    Forest Service management of funds. The Committee has included
    bill language to control departmental assessments for
    administrative functions and working capital funds.
        Last year the Committee commissioned the National Academy
    of Public Administration (NAPA) to do a review of the Forest
    Service efforts to modernize its fiscal procedures and evaluate
    the budget structures and process of the agency. The Committee
    will work with the NAPA and the Forest Service to implement
    recommendations from this study once it is complete. Until that
    time, the Committee has only implemented minor budget
    restructuring which joins maintenance and construction
    functions in a new reconstruction and maintenance appropriation
    account.
        The Committee remains concerned that the Forest Service
    still has not made sufficient progress with establishing
    understandable, repeatable measures that demonstrate to the
    public and the Congress what work is being accomplished with
    annual appropriations. There remains an urgent need for
    tactical measures which can be used as a basis to determine
    successful or inferior annual performance of the broad and
    difficult multiple use mission of the Forest Service. Long term
    strategic measures may well involve slow-changing health of the
    land and waters, but annual measures should involve outputs as
    well as outcomes. The Committee reiterates its previous
    direction that the budget formulation and allocation processes
    must be linked closely to the forest plans, and vise versa.
    This will allow realistic budget requests that related to on-
    the-ground work with performance accountability, and allow the
    Congress to understand more fully the consequences of various
    funding alternatives.

                         forest and rangeland research

        Forest and rangeland research conducts research through a
    network of six regional research and/or experiment stations, a
    National forest products laboratory, and the International
    Institute for Tropical Forestry. The Committee stresses that
    this research and development should support all of the
    Nation's forests and rangelands and that technology transfer
    and practical applications are vital.

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $197,444,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................       234,644,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................       204,373,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................        +6,929,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................       -30,271,000

        The Committee recommends $204,373,000 for forest and
    rangeland research, $30,271,000 below the budget request and
    $6,929,000 above the 1999 funding level. The Committee supports
    the importance of science and research for both public and
    other land management, but the Committee does not have the
    resources available to fund the massive increases requested
    this year. The Committee has provided no funding for new
    program starts such as the climate change technology initiative
    nor increases requested for the global change program. The
    funding increase above the 1999 level includes $5,000,000 to
    enhance the forest inventory and analysis (FIA) program. Other
    than as noted below, the remainder of the increase is to offset
    partially fixed cost increases. The Committee expects Forest
    Service scientists to be available for participation in NFS
    efforts requiring scientific advise and analysis without
    repayment for services from the NFS. The Committee recommends
    $200,000 for the ``CROP'' project on the Colville National
    Forest, $300,000 for the landscape management project at the
    University of Washington, and $200,000 for special research
    needs documenting changes in the twenty years since Mt. St.
    Helens exploded. The Coweeta ecological research site funding
    should be no less than the fiscal year 1999 level.
        The increased funding for the FIA program should be focused
    on cost share opportunities. This funding should go towards
    collecting field-level plot data, stressing those States which
    have demonstrated a commitment through cash or in-kind
    contributions to the program. The FIA staff should work closely
    with the national forest system staff and the Natural Resources
    Conservation Service, national rangeland inventory so as to
    ensure consistency of inventory data and methods across
    ownerships.
        The Committee is concerned about the potentially high
    initial costs in some regions of the country of implementing
    the requirements of section 253(c) of the Agricultural Research
    Extension and Education Reform Act of 1998, which mandates that
    20 percent of inventory plots be measured annually to achieve a
    five year inventory cycle. The Committee, therefore, supports
    agreements between the Forest Service and State foresters to
    flexibly apply the standards of section 253(c) in order to
    accommodate unique State needs and unique regional forest
    conditions.

                           State and private forestry

        Through cooperative programs with State and local
    governments, forest industry and private landowners, the Forest
    Service helps to protect and manage 805 million acres of forest
    and associated watershed land. Technical and financial
    assistance is offered to improve fire management, insect and
    disease control; improve harvesting, processing and monitoring
    of forest products; and stimulate reforestation and timber
    stand improvement. The Forest Service provides special
    expertise and disease suppression for all Federal and tribal
    lands, as well as cooperative assistance with the States for
    State and private lands.

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $170,722,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................       252,422,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................       181,464,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................       +10,742,000

        imate, 2000.......................................       -70,958,000

        The Committee recommends $181,464,000 for State and private
    forestry, $70,958,000 below the budget request and $10,742,000
    above the 1999 funding level.
        The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the
    budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

        Forest health management.--The Committee recommends
    $62,025,000 for forest health management, $300,000 above the
    request and $7,500,000 above the 1999 funding level for these
    activities. The Committee remains very concerned with forest
    health in the broad sense; the funding level for Federal lands
    forest health management maintains recent funding increases and
    fully funds fixed cost increases as well as requested program
    increases. It is vital that the Forest Service provide all
    Federal land managers with quality, timely insect and disease
    expertise, inventories, and where needed, control so as to
    protect Federal lands and investments and also protect
    neighboring private, tribal or State lands. The Committee notes
    that it is not the Federal role to provide funds to States,
    tribes or citizens to directly manage non-Federal lands for
    conditions related to past pest outbreaks. The Committee is
    concerned with the great amount of time it has taken to develop
    and verify national risk-rating maps. Such maps and associated
    data are vital to help the Congress and the public set
    priorities for scarce forest management funding resources. The
    Committee directs the Forest Service to complete the insect and
    disease risk maps by November 1, 1999, keep them up-to-date,
    and provide the Congress with updated maps at least on a semi-
    annual basis thereafter.
        The Committee recommends $21,700,000 for cooperative lands
    forest health management, $300,000 above the request and
    $4,500,000 above the 1999 funding level. Funding for the
    cooperative lands forest health management activity should
    fully fund the Slow-the-spread gypsy moth program. The
    Committee has added $300,000 above the base for assistance
    activities related to the Asian long-horn beetle and similar
    insect problems in New York City, Chicago, and other urban
    centers. The Committee urges the Forest Service to continue to
    take a comprehensive forest health view and include substantial
    efforts to manage and control noxious, exotic and alien plants
    on NFS lands. The Committee urges the Forest Service to
    integrate fully forest health inventories and management
    actions into National forest land management plans and make
    such information consistent with Forest Inventory and Analysis
    for all land ownerships.
        Cooperative fire protection.--The Committee recommends
    $29,150,000 for cooperative fire protection, $5,640,000 above
    the 1999 funding level and $4,360,000 below the budget request
    for these activities. The Committee recommends an increase of
    $3,640,000 for State fire assistance above the 1999 funding
    level. The Committee recognizes and applauds the successful
    partnership of the Forest Service and the States at wildfire
    management. The Committee has also doubled the 1999 allocation
    to the volunteer fire assistance program to a funding level of
    $4,000,000. Volunteers not only provide vital assistance to
    their home districts, but it is in the Federal interest to have
    these firefighters equipped with compatible gear so they can be
    effective members of multi-agency wildfire teams during
    emergencies.
        Cooperative forestry.--The Committee recommends $90,289,000
    for cooperative forestry, $66,898,000 below the budget request
    and $2,398,000 below the 1999 funding level. Given the limited
    resources available, the Committee has focused resources on
    Federal technical assistance programs rather than the massive,
    over 600 percent, increase requested for conservation easement
    purchases through the States with the forest legacy program.
    Similarly, the Committee has been provided with no decent
    rationale to transfer $10,000,000 from the stewardship
    incentive program, as requested, to the USDA rural business
    cooperative program. The Committee strongly suggests that any
    future requests of this nature be referred to the proper
    appropriations subcommittee. The Committee has inadequate
    resources to fund the stewardship incentives program. The
    Committee recommends $29,430,000 for forest stewardship; this
    provides full funding for the budget request and an increase
    above the request of $300,000 for activities in the New York
    City watershed and $300,000 for the Northeast Pennsylvania
    community forestry program. The Committee recommends $7,040,000
    for the forest legacy program, $28,000 above the 1999 level;
    the increase covers fixed costs. The Committee directs the
    Forest Service to allocate forest legacy funding to those
    projects which enhance Federal lands, Federal investments or
    complement past Federal assistance efforts. The Committee
    recommends $32,000,000 for the urban and community forestry
    activity, $1,460,000 above the 1999 funding level and
    $8,040,000 below the request. This recommendation includes
    $250,000, as requested, to support the Northeastern
    Pennsylvania community forestry program and maintains the
    Chicago wilderness program at the 1999 level. The Committee
    continues to believe that a primary purpose of the cooperative
    forestry program is to provide advanced, Federal technical
    assistance to States, tribes and citizens. Therefore, the
    Committee opposes block grants to States as a substitute for
    this appropriation.
        The Committee recommends $13,819,000 for economic action
    programs, $2,486,000 below the request and $3,486,000 below the
    1999 level. Within the economic action program the Committee
    recommends the following distribution of funds:

    Economic recovery.....................................        $3,925,000
    Rural development.....................................         5,000,000
    Forest products conservation and recycling............           950,000
    Wood in transportation................................         1,000,000
    Water quality:
        Lake Tahoe erosion control grants.................         1,000,000
        New York City watershed enhancement...............           500,000
    Hood River, OR, beach facilities......................           275,000
    The Dalles, OR, riverfront trail......................         1,169,000

        The Committee directs the Forest Service to maintain the
    Four Corners Initiative and the allocation for rural
    development in the northeast and midwest at the 1999 levels.
    The Committee also notes that the Port of Hood River has
    contributed large amounts of funds and land resources to
    further the purposes of the Columbia River Gorge National
    Scenic Area Act. The recommended funds are authorized by this
    Act; the funds will complete bathroom facilities at a major
    recreation site in the national scenic area which will not only
    serve visitors to the national scenic area, but will also
    reduce demands on other less developed and more environmentally
    sensitive lands nearby within the national forest system.
    Similarly, the funds for The Dalles riverfront trail complement
    other funds from a large variety of State, county, private and
    Federal highway fund sources. This trail will connect major
    Federal installations at the upstream entrance to the Columbia
    River Gorge. The Committee also recommends $8,000,000 for the
    Pacific Northwest Assistance programs, $1,000,000 above the
    request and $1,000,000 below the 1999 level.
        International forestry.--The Committee has not provided
    specific funding for international forestry activities. The
    Committee recommends that the Forest Service may spend up to
    $3,500,000, the same as in 1999, to cover vital international
    forestry activities as authorized. The House and Senate
    Committees on Appropriations should be notified of the funding
    mix used. The Committee is encouraged by the successful
    partnerships instituted and planned in the international
    program.

                             National Forest System

        Within the National Forest System (NFS), which covers 192
    million acres, there are 51 Congressionally designated areas,
    including 19 National recreation areas, and 7 National scenic
    areas. The NFS includes a substantial amount of the Nation's
    softwood inventory. More than 9,000 farmers and ranchers pay
    for permits to graze cattle, horses, sheep and goats on 74
    million acres of grassland, open forests, and other forage-
    producing acres of the National Forest System. Recreational use
    of National forest land amounted to approximately 859 million
    visits in 1997. The NFS includes over 125,000 miles of trails
    and 23,000 developed facilities, including 4,389 campgrounds,
    58 major visitor centers, and about one-half of the Nation's
    ski-lift capacity. Wilderness areas cover 35 million acres,
    nearly two-thirds of the wilderness in the contiguous 48
    States. The Forest Service also has major habitat management
    responsibilities for more than 3,000 species of wildlife and
    fish, and 10,000 plant species and provides important habitat
    and open space for over 300 threatened or endangered species.
    Half of the Nation's big game and coldwater fish habitat,
    including salmon and steelhead, is located on National Forest
    System lands and waters. In addition, in the 16 western States,
    where the water supply is sometimes critically short, about 55
    percent of the total annual yield of water is from National
    Forest System lands.

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................    $1,298,570,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................     1,357,178,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................     1,254,434,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................       -44,136,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................      -102,744,000

        The Committee recommends $1,254,434,000 for the national
    forest system, $102,744,000 below the budget request and
    $44,136,000 below the 1999 funding level. As requested, the
    Committee has moved the facility and trail maintenance
    activities out of the National forest system account in order
    to increase program oversight and efficiency. This transfer
    accounts for most of the apparent funding reduction below the
    1999 enacted level. The Committee also notes that there were
    numerous technical errors in presentation of the President's
    official budget appendix by the Office of Management and
    Budget, including a $75,669,000 disconnect between the agency
    budget justification and the level indicated in the President's
    budget appendix. The Committee has corrected this error with an
    entry in the detail table below. It is not helpful to the
    Committee to have to evaluate budget presentations for
    technical deficiencies, so the Committee requests that the
    administration increase its proof-reading and validation
    efforts and also submit official corrections to errors once
    found.
        The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the
    budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

        Land management planning.--The Committee recommends
    $42,000,000 for land management planning, $2,000,000 above the
    1999 level and $8,000,000 below the request. This funding is
    provided for National forest and grassland planning, including
    plan amendments, revisions, and updates. The Committee is
    retaining this as a separate activity because this offers the
    best means of achieving some cost accountability and control
    for the endless planning efforts engaged in by the Forest
    Service. The Committee is concerned that the Forest Service
    apparently ignored the Committee direction during fiscal year
    1999 that funding for the Sierra Nevada framework planning and
    science effort be limited to $2,000,000. Therefore, the
    Committee has not provided the requested funding increase for
    planning or inventory. It is essential that the Forest Service
    learn to manage its programs, especially planning efforts,
    within available resources. Far too much funding and personnel
    efforts have been side-tracked into massive and unending
    planning and assessment exercises. The Forest Service shall not
    use other program funding for forest planning absent approved
    reprogramming requests. The Committee is still waiting for new
    forest planning regulations to be completed over six years
    since the effort began. The Committee expects the Forest
    Service to include in the new planning regulations guidance
    linking forest land management plans to budget realities. The
    updated forest plans should incorporate realistic budgetary
    projections and should include a realistic outline of the
    program of work, and resulting costs, that are being projected
    and planned.
        Inventory and monitoring.--The Committee recommends
    $82,000,000 for inventory and monitoring, $6,114,000 below the
    request and $1,286,000 above the 1999 level.
        Recreation use.--The Committee recommends $199,135,000 for
    recreation use, $4,558,000 above the budget request and
    $11,548,000 above the 1999 level. The Committee has included
    $155,000,000 for the recreation management subactivity,
    $10,047,000 above both the request and the 1999 level.
        The Committee is encouraged by the creative and responsive
    efforts of the Forest Service to implement the recreation fee
    demonstration program. The Committee notes that the Forest
    Service has altered substantially a number of projects in
    response to the public. Despite the overall scarcity of
    resources available to the Committee, the Committee has
    allocated a substantial increase for recreation management
    above the request and has also included bill language in Title
    III which should allow the agency to administer and serve the
    public better for various special land uses. The Challenge Cost
    Share (CCS) program funding for recreation use should be no
    less than the 1999 level. The Committee has provided increases
    above the 1999 level for both wilderness management and
    heritage resources in order to cover fully fixed cost
    increases. The Committee recognizes the National significance
    of the Pacific Crest, Continental Divide, and Florida National
    Scenic Trails and the Nez Perce National Historic Trail and
    directs that funding for their management be no less than the
    1999 level. Similarly, funding should be maintained at least at
    the 1999 level for those parts of the Appalachian, North
    Country and Ice Age National Scenic Trails and the Lewis &
    Clark, Santa Fe, Iditarod, Oregon, California, and Pony Express
    and Overmountain Victory National Historic trails managed by
    the Forest Service.
        Wildlife, fish and rare plant habitat management.--The
    Committee recommends $103,525,000 for wildlife, fish and rare
    plant habitat management, $20,251,000 below the request and
    $3,149,000 above the 1999 level. The increase above the 1999
    level is to offset partially fixed cost increases. The CCS
    program funding should be at least at the 1999 levels and
    should not be subordinated to other internal overhead or
    program management uses. The Committee notes that funds may be
    used for important habitat work off the national forest system
    if it helps improve Federal investments or lands.
        Rangeland management.--The Committee recommends $59,882,000
    for rangeland management, $5,168,000 below the budget request
    but an increase of $2,832,000 above the 1999 funding level. The
    increased funding over 1999 is provided for fixed cost
    increases; $400,000 of the increase in the rangeland vegetation
    management activity is directed to be used for the Region 5
    grazing monitoring cooperative effort.
        Forestland management.--The Committee recommends
    $281,000,000 for forestland management, $10,815,000 above the
    budget request and $4,200,000 below the 1999 funding level. The
    Committee is very concerned about the health of forests on
    National forest system lands and accordingly has provided a
    variety of mechanisms to enhance vegetation management
    activities. The Forest Service allocation of timber sales and
    vegetation management funds should include a mechanism to
    provide substantially more resources to those areas of the
    Nation that are at risk to insect, disease or wildfire loss.
    Selection of priority stands for treatment should consider the
    resulting forest conditions, including the potential for fuels
    reduction, the potential for enhanced habitat values, as well
    as the potential for increased timber growth. The Committee
    directs the Forest Service to reallocate the reforestation
    fund, as authorized, to treat high priority areas that are
    either susceptible to catastrophic fire or are in need of
    thinning or other management to enhance watershed health and
    improve overall forest conditions. The Committee once again
    suggests that the Forest Service should use at least $500,000
    of the vegetation management funds within the challenge cost
    share program so as to maximize the impact of these Federal
    funds. The Committee has included $300,000 to continue the CROP
    program to treat stagnated stands on the Colville National
    Forest and $300,000 for environmental education at the Cradle
    of Forestry, NC. The Committee has not provided funding for the
    newly proposed forest ecosystem restoration and improvement
    activity because there has been an inadequate explanation of
    how and where these funds would be used. The Committee notes
    that the Forest Service can and should use the reforestation
    fund, the road and trails fund, and vegetation management,
    wildlife and fish habitat improvement, hazardous fuels
    reduction, stewardship contracting and watershed improvement
    funding, as directed by the Committee in previous years, for
    the purposes outlined for the newly proposed subactivity. The
    Committee expects the Forest Service to continue to implement
    the stewardship end-result contracting demonstration pilot
    established in fiscal year 1999.
        Timber sales.--The Committee recommends $220,000,000 for
    timber sales, $23,115,000 above the budget request and
    $6,900,000 below the 1999 level. The Committee notes that the
    fuelwood and special forest products programs, as well as
    stewardship timber sales, are cost effective ways of servicing
    public needs and improving forest stand conditions even though
    these programs cause the overall timber sales program to have a
    higher cost than monetary return. The Committee understands
    that these programs are providing substantial public benefits,
    so the Nation is well-served with appropriated funds going for
    these purposes.
        The Committee is aware of the widespread forest health
    problems in the national forests across the country and the
    efforts to complete maps which clearly show these problems.
    Such maps should be used to help prioritize allocations of
    funds so some areas of the nation in greatest need are able to
    use some of the increased funds above the request to tackle the
    forest health problems. In this regard, the Committee
    understands that the agency can use the timber sale program as
    a cost-efficient tool to thin and restructure forest stands.
    Funds within the timber sales management account should be used
    for this purpose, and the agency is encouraged to make every
    effort to include preventive forest health treatments as part
    of timber salvage efforts. The Committee has funded the timber
    sales program to produce the same total sale offer as in fiscal
    year 1999, about 3.6 BBF, consisting of 2.6 BBF of ``green''
    sales. The remainder of the expected timber sales consists of
    the administration requested level for the salvage sales
    program. The Committee notes that this harvest level is greatly
    reduced from recent times and that local economies can not
    withstand further reductions to this program.
        To ensure that Congress is adequately informed and notified
    of progress or delays in implementing the fiscal year 2000
    program, the Committee requests that the agency continue its
    regular, quarterly reporting of timber sale preparation, offer,
    sale and harvest accomplishments--including a region by region
    status report. The Committee expects the reports to include
    detailed information on the status of the timber sales pipeline
    and an identification of the volumes offered, sold, and
    harvested categorized as net merchantable sawtimber. Timber
    program accomplishments should report timber actually sold and
    transferred to purchasers, and the volume offered. The reports
    are to be as comprehensive as possible and provide information
    on both green and salvage sales. The Committee understands that
    considerable resources are needed to implement the new timber
    information manager computer programs (TIM), but these
    automation improvements will enhance public service and
    management capabilities. The TIM must be made to be fully
    compatible with the agency-wide reporting systems. Any
    additional salvage opportunities that may arise during fiscal
    year 2000 should not impact green sale targets.
        Soil, water and air management.--The Committee recommends
    $60,932,000 for soil, water and air management, $6,165,000
    below the budget request but an increase of $4,835,000 above
    the 1999 funding level. The Committee has provided, within the
    increased funding above the enacted level, $1,000,000 to work
    on rehabilitation of damaged lands, especially those with acid-
    mine drainage problems, on the Wayne National Forest. The
    funding level for the CCS program should be maintained at the
    1999 level.
        Minerals and geology management.--The Committee recommends
    $38,300,000 for minerals and geology management, $2,250,000
    above the budget request and $1,250,000 above the 1999 funding
    level. The Committee recommended funding level should cover
    fixed cost increases.
        Land ownership management.--The Committee recommends
    $63,972,000 for land ownership management, equal to the request
    and $2,833,000 above the 1999 funding level. The Committee held
    detailed hearings on fair market charges for various land uses
    and associated management activities by the Forest Service.
    While the Committee understands that funding shortfalls often
    hamper permit administration, the Committee also is concerned
    that these administrative and public service tasks are often
    not given their proper priority with field line managers. As a
    result of the hearings, the Committee has added legislative
    language in Title III, Section 328, to assist the Forest
    Service to recover the costs of permit and land use
    administration. This will provide enhanced public service to
    Federal taxpayers for public resources that are used by private
    entities. The Committee will work closely with the Forest
    Service to see that this new authority is carefully
    implemented. The Committee encourages the Forest Service to
    continue to work closely with the Bureau of Land Management in
    order that these programs are compatible across Federal land
    ownership lines, thereby minimizing bureaucracy and
    inconvenience to the public.
        Infrastructure management.--The Committee has transferred
    the activities previously included in the infrastructure
    management budget line item in order to increase efficiency and
    oversight. The facility maintenance recreation and non-
    recreation activities, as well as the trail maintenance
    activity, have been included with reconstruction and
    construction activities in the newly named ``reconstruction and
    maintenance'' appropriation account.
        Law enforcement operations.--The Committee recommends
    $68,288,000 for law enforcement operations, $2,000,000 above
    both the budget request and the 1999 funding level. The
    Committee remains concerned about special law enforcement
    problems on the National forest system associated with drug
    enforcement in Kentucky and directs that funding for these
    programs in Kentucky be maintained at the 1999 level.
        Land Between the Lakes.--The Committee notes that Title V
    of the fiscal year 1999 Interior and Related Agencies
    Appropriations Act included legislation, the Land Between the
    Lakes (LBL) Protection Act of 1998, that transfers this
    property to Forest Service management in any fiscal year that
    the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) does not receive an
    appropriation of at least $6,000,000 for LBL management.
    Accordingly, the Committee has included sufficient funds this
    year to provide for management of the LBL by the Forest
    Service. The Committee has included $7,000,000, consisting of
    $5,400,000 of national forest system funds, $1,300,000 in
    reconstruction and maintenance funds, and $300,000 in wildfire
    management funds. Should this land transfer occur in fiscal
    year 2000 as expected, the instructions provided by the
    Congress during fiscal year 1999 should be followed.
        General administration.--The Committee recommends
    $250,000,000 for general administration, $6,400,000 below both
    the budget request and the 1999 funding level. The Committee
    still has huge concerns about the use of administrative funds
    by the Forest Service and the Department of Agriculture. The
    Committee is also concerned that last year's direction
    regarding the funding of administrative functions was not
    implemented by the Forest Service. Rather than take steps at
    this point to alter the current configuration of the general
    administration activity, the Committee has maintained the
    budget structure for now while awaiting the report from the
    National Academy of Public Administration. The Committee
    understands that the fiscal situation of the Forest Service has
    been unacceptable and that considerable work and resources are
    needed to solve past problems. However, the Committee is also
    very concerned that the Forest Service is hiring too many
    permanent staff at headquarters for accounting and related
    activities when the increased work-load at headquarters
    resulting from implementing the new system will not be
    permanent. The Committee directs the Forest Service and the
    department to provide a detailed report within 30 days of
    enactment that clearly shows all fiscal, budget and related
    business functions of both institutions, how these services are
    specifically interrelated, and that indicates the funding
    sources and costs for all staff and contractors involved in
    these activities. The Committee is also concerned that
    insufficient provisions have been made by the Forest Service to
    test new financial management computer systems before
    implementing them, and that inadequate back-up systems are in
    place should the new agency-wide fiscal system not perform. The
    Committee expects to receive regular updates during fiscal year
    2000 as the new fiscal systems are being implemented.
        The Committee has included bill language requiring the
    display of unobligated balances available at the end of the
    fiscal year, by expanded budget line item and by region, in
    order to display better to the Congress and the public previous
    expenditures. The Committee is prepared to reinstitute one-year
    funding for the Forest Service if the administration continues
    to try to fund various initiatives that have not been presented
    in budget justifications with prior year carry-over funds.
        The Committee is also concerned that too much scarce
    funding is being used for public affairs and headquarters
    office of communications efforts when on-the-ground needs are
    so great. The Committee directs the Forest Service to provide
    the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations with a
    detailed report within 60 days of enactment that indicates the
    public affairs and communications workload, staffing, and
    funding sources at all levels of the agency. The Committee
    expects an especially detailed explanation of headquarters
    operations and expected accomplishments, as well as performance
    measures that the public can understand.
        General.--The Committee remains concerned about
    accountability for funds. As discussed in last year's Committee
    report, the Forest Service is to maintain all specific
    Congressional designations, in any amount, or to submit a
    reprogramming request if any such designation is proposed for a
    change. The Committee is also concerned about ``National
    commitments'' and ``Washington Office external'' charges. These
    items should be clearly displayed and explained in the budget
    justification and efforts should be made to reduce these
    expenses. The Committee directs that no funds be used for the
    natural resource agenda or conservation education national
    commitment categories until a detailed, agency-wide spending
    plan, including funding sources and expected results, is
    approved by the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations.
    Neither of these activities has been explained in the budget
    justification. The national commitment category is useful for
    short-term funding of multi-program efforts, but it should not
    be used for on-going efforts such as those mentioned above.
    Such efforts should, if they are needed year after year, be
    included in the budget justification as normal programs. The
    Committee is also concerned that the Forest Service has many
    stray conservation education efforts that do not provide a
    coherent effort. The report to the Committees explaining
    conservation education should clearly indicate the legal
    authorities for these efforts and also explain in detail how
    these efforts by the Forest Service relate to, and are
    integrated with, efforts by other Federal agencies, the States,
    and other citizen and institutional groups. The Committee notes
    that the budget request lists $303,000 for the American
    Heritage Rivers effort as a national commitment. The Committee
    directs that no more than $200,000 be allocated to the American
    Heritage Rivers efforts of the Forest Service and that the 3
    local communities having Forest Service river navigators be
    asked to make-up the short-fall with cost sharing; no funds may
    be transferred to or used to support the Council for
    Environmental Quality or other Federal agencies or institutions
    for these purposes; and no funds may be used at headquarters or
    departmental offices. Bill language is included in Title III,
    Section 326, to assure this direction.
        The Committee directs that the Department of Agriculture
    ``Greenbook'' charges for working capital fund and central cost
    distribution be displayed in future budget justifications. In
    order to understand more fully these charges and provide
    additional Congressional oversight, the Committee has included
    bill language preventing transfer of Forest Service funds to
    the department working capital fund until the House and Senate
    Committees on Appropriations have approved a spending plan.
        The Committee commends the Forest Service efforts to
    leverage its funds with non-Federal partners through its
    challenge cost share (CCS) program. The Committee expects that
    the Forest Service will comply with the suggested CCS funding
    levels in the budget justification special exhibit unless
    otherwise noted in this report, and that the direction provided
    by the Committee in fiscal year 1999 will again be followed.
        Administrative provisions.--The Committee has discontinued
    language that is no longer needed limiting clearcutting in the
    Wayne NF, OH and leasing on the Shawnee NF, IL and continued
    language regarding ``Jobs in the Woods'' grants in the State of
    Washington. The Committee understands that no clearcutting will
    occur on these two forests and that clearcutting is rarely used
    elsewhere except to accomplish specific habitat objectives. The
    Committee has retained language concerning fund-raising for the
    Grey Towers National Historic Landmark and the Pinchot
    Institute for Conservation. The Committee is encouraged by
    activities of the Pinchot Institute to raise funds to help
    restore this important facility and notes that future Federal
    funding to complete this project is dependent on a healthy
    partnership with the Pinchot Institute and other institutions.
    The Committee has also retained language requiring
    reimbursement for salary and expenses for employees on details
    exceeding 30 days.
        The Committee has reinstituted language requiring advance
    submission and approval of proposals to change regional
    boundaries, close or move a regional headquarters office, or to
    implement any reorganization. The Committee is especially
    concerned with headquarters expansions that involve hiring
    numerous support personnel for agency administrative
    executives.
        The Committee has included bill language to allow any funds
    available to the Secretary of Agriculture to be transferred to
    the wildland fire appropriation for forest firefighting and
    related activities, but this authority may be used only when
    previously appropriated emergency contingent wildland fire
    funds have been released by the President and apportioned.
    Unfortunately, during recent years the administration has found
    it easier to take funds from Forest Service accounts than to
    release funds appropriated especially for these wildland
    firefighting emergency needs.
        The Committee has included language allowing the Forest
    Service to reimburse the USDA Office of the General Council for
    certain expenses up to $500,000.
        The Committee includes language allowing the Forest Service
    to transfer up to $1,000,000 of available funds to the National
    Forest Foundation and transfers $2,650,000, the same as during
    1999, to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. These funds
    are to be used for matching funds as authorized, thereby
    leveraging additional private funding and furthering the
    multiple use and public service mission of the Forest Service.
    The Committee remains interested in the mission of the National
    Forest Foundation (NFF) yet has been discouraged with previous
    leadership and management of the foundation but is encouraged
    by its new leadership. The Committee has continued authority to
    transfer funds to the NFF for both matching purposes and up to
    $200,000 for administrative purposes. The Committee encourages
    the Department of Agriculture, the Forest Service and the NFF
    to work closely together to reestablish the NFF. The Committee
    hopes that by the beginning of fiscal year 2000 the NFF can
    once again be implementing its authorized mission.
        Forest Service trust fund accountability and performance.--
    The Committee recommends a comprehensive approach to guarantee
    accountability and efficiency for the Forest Service Knutson-
    Vandenberg reforestation trust fund (KV fund), the salvage sale
    fund and the brush disposal fund. As a result of several
    hearings by the Agriculture authorizing committee and program
    examination by this Committee and the General Accounting Office
    (GAO), it has become apparent that the Forest Service has
    inadequately managed these funds and that there is a need to
    provide additional Congressional scrutiny with respect to the
    collection and use of these funds. The Committee notes that
    there is widespread agreement that the reforestation, watershed
    improvement and wildlife habitat restoration work supported by
    the KV fund are all vital to the management of the national
    forest system. The Committee expects the Forest Service
    leadership to do a better job of assuring the American public
    and the Congress that field managers do not have ``slush
    funds'' and that funds collected for trust fund activities are
    used appropriately. The Committee also notes that timber sale
    scheduling and implementation is dependent upon the level of
    appropriations. Field managers must adhere to the sale schedule
    that is made possible by the appropriated funds and, where
    necessary, salvage diseased or dying forests.
        The Committee, after consulting with the Agriculture and
    Resources Committees, recommends the following reforms:
        1. In order to reduce overhead and ensure that funds are
    used for program goals and not for excessive administrative
    costs, the Committee has previously limited the use of indirect
    funds from the KV fund, and the salvage sale and brush disposal
    funds to 20% of expenditures. The Committee is working to
    control and reduce administrative costs. The Committee
    recognizes that there is a legitimate need to administer the
    activities supported by the funds and that the funds should
    provide for these administrative costs.
        2. Funds appropriated for general administration of the
    national forest system shall not be used to supplement
    administration of the KV, salvage sale or brush disposal funds.
        3. The Forest Service is directed to submit a detailed plan
    of operations regarding these three funds to the House and
    Senate Committees on Appropriations, the House Agriculture and
    Resources Committees and the Senate Energy and Natural
    Resources Committee within 90 days of enactment. The Committee
    requires that this plan provide sufficient detail to explain
    and justify the program of work and expected accomplishments at
    each national forest unit using KV funds.
        4. In order to increase efficiency and provide incentives
    to hold costs down, the Committee requires that the plan of
    work include understandable measurements, that monitoring of KV
    activities be an essential component of implementation, and
    that projected and actual unit costs are clearly depicted. The
    Committee expects that the performance measures will allow
    close monitoring of unit costs so as to increase cost-
    efficiency.
        5. The Committee stresses that the work funded by the KV
    fund shall only include those activities that are authorized by
    law, such as reforestation, and improving the future
    productivity of the renewable resources in the timber sale
    area. This allows work on watershed improvements and fish,
    wildlife, and plant habitat improvements as well as maintenance
    and construction related to authorized activities.
        6. The Committee is concerned that in recent years the
    Forest Service has over-used these funds for a variety of
    overhead activities and to pursue various initiatives that do
    not directly relate to the habitat and forest improvement
    activities authorized for the KV fund. Therefore, the Committee
    expects that the Forest Service will not use the three trust
    funds at the regional or Washington office level except for
    activities strictly related to program management and
    oversight, fiscal management, and policy development that
    relates directly to implementing activities authorized by these
    funds.
        7. These trust funds shall not be used for Department of
    Agriculture general assessments nor for general assessments or
    national commitments within the Forest Service.
        8. The Committee notes that the Forest Service has been
    unable to provide comprehensive answers to Congressional or GAO
    questions on the national scope and performance of these trust
    funds. Therefore, the Committee requires that the Forest
    Service develop and implement, by the end of fiscal year 2000,
    an automated process for KV fund management, including all
    phases of KV fund activities from planning to project
    implementation and project monitoring.
        9. The Committee shares public concern that the program of
    work for the KV fund, the brush disposal fund, and the salvage
    sale fund needs to have greater public transparency and
    accountability. Accordingly, the Committee expects that the
    Forest Service will provide in all future budget justifications
    a detailed display of the anticipated program of work for these
    funds in the upcoming year. This display should also provide a
    clearly understandable presentation of how the forest and
    habitat improvement activities supported by these funds relate
    to activities funded with discretionary appropriations. This
    display should indicate the relative priorities of the various
    work and present an integrated approach to forest management.

                            Wildland fire management

    Appropriation enacted, 1999 (excluding emergency).....      $560,176,000
    Contingent emergency enacted, 1999....................       102,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2000 (excluding emergency)...........       560,730,000
    Budget estimate, 2000 contingent emergency............        90,000,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................       561,354,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation (excluding emergency), 1999.........        +1,178,000
        Budget estimate, 2000 (excluding emergency).......          +624,000

        The Committee recommends $561,354,000 for wildland fire
    management, $624,000 above the budget request and $1,178,000
    above the 1999 funding level. The Committee has not included
    the requested emergency contingent funds for fire operations
    but notes, once again, that the previously appropriated
    $250,000,000 in fire emergency funds are still available and
    are readily available for wildfire suppression operations. The
    Committee has included bill language which transfers half of
    the remaining unobligated funds at the end of fiscal year 1999,
    excepting hazardous fuels funding, from this account to pay
    back previously advanced sums. The Committee has also included
    $300,000 for Land Between the Lakes NRA wildfire and fuels
    management.
        The Committee recommendation includes $360,200,000 for
    preparedness and fire use, $35,324,000 above both the budget
    request and the 1999 funding levels. The Committee has
    recommended a substantial increase over the request for
    wildfire preparedness because it is vital to save lives,
    property, and natural resources. The Committee recognizes that
    this is just 75% of the most efficient level (MEL), as
    determined by Forest Service models, and that additional
    funding in this activity, were it available, would provide much
    more than a dollar for dollar savings in subsequent wildfire
    suppression operations and loss of valuable resources. The
    Committee recommends $200,854,000 for fire operations,
    $35,000,000 below the request and $34,446,000 below the 1999
    level. The Committee directs that about $70,000,000 be reserved
    for hazardous fuels operations and that the $5,000,000 increase
    from the enacted be used in those parts of the NFS that have
    particularly severe forest health and wildfire risks. The
    Committee notes that there is $250,000,000 in previously
    appropriated wildfire funding available for emergency use and
    that the Secretary has transfer authority to use other funds
    during emergencies once these previously appropriated emergency
    contingent funds are released and apportioned. The Committee
    directs the Forest Service to provide to the House and Senate
    Committees on Appropriations within 120 days of enactment a
    description of the hazardous fuels situation on NFS lands, the
    priorities, by national forest for their treatment, the means
    for integrating this work with other forest and habitat
    management goals and collaboration with the Department of the
    Interior, performance measures and anticipated accomplishments.
        The Committee notes that the Forest Service has reported
    that at least 40,000,000 acres are in danger of catastrophic
    fire and that much of this area is in the wildland-urban
    interface area where there are substantial life, health,
    property and environmental concerns. The Committee encourages
    use of fuels reduction funds in the wildland-urban interface
    and expects that mechanical treatments will frequently be
    employed, including the capture of commercial value of trees
    thinned for fuels reduction and forestry purposes. The
    Committee is encouraged by increased integration of the fuels
    program into National forest system management, but there still
    is a need to incorporate fuels work into a larger vision of
    habitat and forest desired future conditions. The hazardous
    fuels program should be thoroughly integrated with related
    programs, such as forest vegetation management, habitat and
    watershed improvement funds, the reforestation fund, and the
    road and trail fund, to maximize multiple benefits to society
    by reducing fire danger, improving watershed and habitat
    conditions, and increasing forest health. The Committee expects
    the Forest Service to do a more thorough job in its future
    budget justifications at explaining the wildfire program and
    how it relates to overall forest and rangeland management and
    how its program goals and accomplishments can be integrated
    into the overall agency mission and its performance measured.
        The Committee has included funding at the 1999 level for
    the Joint Fire Science Program in both the Forest Service and
    the Department of the Interior and looks forward to receiving
    progress reports from the Governing Board and program managers.
    The Committee has included bill language allowing this program
    to use grant authorities available to the research branch.
        The Committee urges the two Departments to continue to work
    closely together to develop common budget and program
    management approaches to wildland fire management. In
    particular, the Committee expects that future budget
    justifications and requests for both preparedness and
    operations will reflect common assumptions and budget
    strategies (such as percent of MEL and percent of ten-year
    average) for the two Departments.

                         reconstruction and maintenance

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $302,963,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................       295,000,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................       396,602,000
    Comparison:
      Appropriation, 1999.................................       +93,639,000
      Budget estimate, 2000...............................      +101,602,000

        The Committee recommends $396,602,000 for reconstruction
    and maintenance, a new account. This new account is created by
    transferring facility and trail maintenance from the
    infrastructure maintenance activity within the national forest
    system account and joining it with the former reconstruction
    and construction account. The recommended funding level is an
    increase of $101,602,000 above the budget request for the
    proposed new account, ``public asset protection and
    management'' and an increase of $93,639,000 above the 1999
    funding level for the reconstruction and construction
    appropriation account. The Committee notes that there was a
    disconnect between the funding level in the Forest Service
    budget request and that provided by the OMB in the official
    President's budget appendix. Since an official budget
    correction was never presented to the Committee, an adjustment
    is included in the detail table below. The Committee has also
    included $1,300,000 for Land Between the Lakes NRA facilities,
    road and trail maintenance.
        The Committee agrees to the following distribution of
    funds:

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                       Committee
                                                                1999 enacted       2000 request      recommendation
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Reconstruction and construction
    Research:
        Admin request projects.............................          5,010,000          7,510,000          7,500,000
        Other..............................................          7,000,000
                                                            --------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal: Research...............................         12,010,000          7,510,000          7,500,000
                                                            ========================================================
    Fire, admin, other:
        Marienville RS consolidation PA....................  .................  .................          1,140,000
        Other..............................................          5,247,000  .................  .................
        Other admin request projects.......................         19,699,000         22,946,000         22,946,000
                                                            --------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal: FAO....................................         24,946,000         22,946,000         24,086,000
                                                            ========================================================
    Recreation:
        Allegheny NF rec facilities PA.....................  .................  .................            400,000
        Angeles NF toilet and water system rehab CA........  .................  .................          1,200,000
        Badin Lake cmpgrd NC...............................          1,000,000  .................            400,000
        Boone NF Rockcastle boat ramp KY...................  .................  .................            375,000
        Cradle of Forestry NC..............................            559,000  .................          1,078,000
        Ocoee boater put-in & Thunder Rock cmpgd TN........  .................  .................            600,000
        San Bernardino NF Dogwood cmpg CA..................  .................  .................          1,200,000
        Santa Inez First Crossing CA.......................  .................  .................            950,000
        Waldo Lake sanitation OR...........................  .................  .................            800,000
        Other..............................................         10,670,000  .................  .................
        Projects subtotal..................................  .................  .................          7,003,000
        Other admin request................................         20,720,000         32,949,000         32,949,000
                                                            --------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal: Recreation reconstruction..............         32,949,000         32,949,000         39,952,000
                                                            ========================================================
          Subtotal facilities reconstruction...............         69,905,000         63,405,000         71,538,000
                                                            ========================================================
             Trail reconstruction and construction
    Continental Divide trail (various).....................            500,000             75,000            500,000
    Florida National Scenic Trail..........................            250,000  .................            250,000
    Ocoee river trail system TN............................  .................  .................            300,000
    VA Creeper trail repair VA.............................  .................  .................            500,000
    Other Admin. request projects..........................         13,200,000         12,979,000         12,979,000
    Other trail reconstruction.............................         15,304,000                  0         14,173,000
                                                            --------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal trails construction:....................         29,554,000         13,054,000         28,702,000
                                                            ========================================================
              Road reconstruction and construction
    Admin. Request projects................................         97,509,000         96,468,000         99,909,000
    Other..................................................            500,000  .................  .................
                                                            --------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal Road reconstruction.....................         98,009,000         96,468,000         99,909,000
                                                            ========================================================
    Emergency appropriation PL 106-31......................          5,611,000  .................  .................
                                                            ========================================================
          Subtotal Reconstruction and construction.........        203,079,000        172,927,000        200,149,000
                                                            ========================================================
                          Maintenance
    Facilities.............................................       (52,224,000)         55,224,000         55,224,000
    Road Maint. & decommissioning..........................         99,884,000        122,484,000        119,484,000
    Trails.................................................       (18,445,000)         20,445,000         20,445,000
                                                            --------------------------------------------------------
          Maintenance subtotal.............................         99,884,000        198,153,000        195,153,000
                                                            ========================================================
    Land between lakes, maintenance, repairs...............                  0                  0          1,300,000
    Adjustment to President's budget.......................  .................        -76,080,000  .................
                                                            --------------------------------------------------------
          Total............................................        302,963,000        295,000,000        396,602,000
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Reconstruction and Construction

        Facilities construction and reconstruction.--The Committee
    recommends $71,538,000 for facilities construction and
    reconstruction, $8,133,000 above the budget request and
    $1,633,000 above the 1999 funding level. The challenge cost
    share funding levels should follow the budget justification.
    The Committee notes that there is a huge backlog in deferred
    maintenance and repairs for Forest Service facilities, roads
    and trails. Solving this problem will take time, effort,
    resources and many partnerships. The Forest Service should
    continue its efforts to document backlogs and display this
    information in the budget justification. The Committee has
    provided full funding for the projects in the budget request
    and notes that virtually all of the funds provided herein are
    for reconstruction, repair or replacement of deteriorated
    facilities. No funds are included for the Region 9 relocation.
    The Committee also encourages the Forest Service to evaluate
    carefully its facility needs and strive to dispose of unneeded
    facilities.
        Research.--The Committee recommends $7,500,000, $10,000
    below the budget request and $4,510,000 below the 1999 level
    for research facility construction.
        Fire, administrative, other (FAO).--The Committee
    recommends $24,886,000 for FAO facilities construction and
    reconstruction, $1,940,000 above the budget request and $60,000
    below the 1999 level. The Committee expects that the
    Marienville ranger station consolidation, when completed, will
    result in long-term cost savings in facilities and staffing for
    the joined ranger districts.
        Recreation facilities.--The Committee recommends
    $39,952,000 for recreation facilities construction and
    reconstruction, $7,003,000 above both the budget request and
    the 1999 enacted level.
        Trail reconstruction and construction.--The Committee
    recommends $28,702,000 for trail reconstruction, $852,000 below
    the 1999 level but an increase of $15,648,000 above the budget
    request. The Committee does not concur with the Administration
    request to use the road and trails fund to replace basic trail
    needs. The Committee notes that the Forest Service is using
    those funds to great advantage to reduce some of the vast
    backlog in deferred maintenance and repairs. These projects
    prevent adverse environmental or health consequences, and their
    funding should not be slashed, as requested by the
    administration, in order to provide for basic trail
    reconstruction. Challenge cost share funding should adhere to
    the budget justification.
        Road reconstruction and construction.--The Committee
    recommends $99,909,000 for road reconstruction and
    construction, $3,441,000 above the request and $1,900,000 above
    the 1999 level. As provided in fiscal year 1999, the timber
    purchaser road credit program is eliminated. The Committee
    recommendation includes no appropriated funds to improve or
    construct timber access roads. Timber purchasers will
    reconstruct access roads if needed; funds recommended by the
    Committee provide needed design and National Environmental
    Policy Act mandated environmental review, public involvement
    and disclosure. Nation-wide, as requested by the
    Administration, only 6.2 miles of new roads will be
    constructed. The increase above the request includes $1,350,000
    for reconstruction of the Tunnel Ridge road and construction of
    the Nose Dock boat ramp on the Boone NF, KY.

                                  Maintenance

        The Committee recommends $195,153,000 for maintenance,
    $3,000,000 below the request for these activities and
    $24,600,000 above the 1999 funding level for these same
    activities. The Committee has provided the requested funding
    level for facilities maintenance, $55,224,000. The
    recommendation for road maintenance is $3,000,000 below the
    request but it is $19,600,000 above the 1999 funding level. The
    Committee understands the great needs for maintaining the vast
    road system and so has given this activity a large increase.
    The Committee recommends $20,445,000 for trail maintenance, the
    same as the budget request and $2,000,000 above the 1999
    funding level. The Committee expects to continue to receive
    regular reports and briefings on progress attacking the huge
    backlog of deferred maintenance and repair, especially as it
    relates to the activities funded through the road and trails
    fund. The Committee is pleased with the work accomplished
    during the past year with these funds.
        The Committee is concerned that road decommissioning and
    closures should not be pursued aggressively until the new road
    policy is fully understood and implemented. However, for the
    entire NFS road decommissioning will exceed greatly the extent
    of new road construction. The Committee has continued bill
    language allowing up to $15,000,000 to be used for road
    decommissioning. The Committee recommends that transportation
    planning be done at the local National forest level and be
    closely coordinated with the forest planning process so that
    decisions affecting rural America are made with the best data
    in hand and with full knowledge of local impacts to communities
    and the environment. The Committee has provided substantial
    resources to manage the road system, recognizing how important
    this is for Americans to access and enjoy their National
    forests and grasslands.

                                land acquisition

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $117,918,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................       118,000,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................         1,000,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................      -116,918,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................      -117,000,000

        The Committee recommends a total of $41,000,000 for land
    acquisition. This amount includes $1,000,000 in newly
    appropriated funds and the use of $40,000,000 in fiscal year
    1999 funding, which had been provided for the Baca Ranch, NM.
    These funds have been redirected because the landowners
    withdrew their offer to sell. The amount recommended by the
    Committee is a decrease of $116,918,000 below the enacted level
    and $117,000,000 below the fiscal year 2000 budget request. The
    Committee recommends the following distribution of funds:
                                                                   Committee
            Area and State                                    recommendation
    Angeles NF (Pacific Crest Trail) (CA)...................      $1,500,000
    Bar T Bar Ranch (Coconino NF) (AZ)......................       3,000,000
    Big Sur (Los Padres NF) (CA)............................       4,000,000
    Chattooga WSR (GA/SC/NC)................................       1,000,000
    Coconino NF (Sedona Rock) (AZ)..........................       3,500,000
    Daniel Boone NF (KY)....................................       2,500,000
    Flathead NF (Lindberg Lake) (MT)........................       2,000,000
    Hoosier NF (IN).........................................       1,000,000
    Mark Twain NF (MO)......................................       1,000,000
    Pacific NW Streams (Bowe Ranch) (WA)....................       2,000,000
    San Bernardino NF (CA)..................................       2,500,000
    Santa Fe NF (Jemez River) (NM)..........................       1,000,000
    Sawtooth NF (ID)........................................       2,000,000
    Wayne NF (OH)...........................................       1,000,000
    White Mountains NF (Lake Umbagog) (NH)..................       1,000,000
                        --------------------------------------------------------
                        ____________________________________________________
          Subtotal..........................................      29,000,000
    Emergency inholdings....................................       1,500,000
    Wilderness inholdings...................................         500,000
    Cash Equalization.......................................       1,500,000
    Acquisition Management..................................       8,500,000
                        --------------------------------------------------------
                        ____________________________________________________
          Total.............................................      41,000,000

        The Committee considers the Pacific Crest National Scenic
    Trail, which extends from California through Oregon and
    Washington States, to be a high priority and has included funds
    to initiate emergency land purchases near the Angeles National
    Forest. The Committee recognizes that many existing narrow
    easements, often less than 20 feet wide, coupled with
    encroaching development, offer inadequate protection for many
    sections of the trail. In addition, in certain locations there
    are relocations that could provide a much more scenic route and
    a significantly higher quality hiking experience for trail
    users.
        The Committee understands that approximately 300 miles of
    the 2,650 mile trail may be inadequately protected or located.
    Although the Committee has provided funds this year to begin
    protection of the most endangered portions, the Committee is
    deeply concerned that the Federal agencies have done very
    little planning and detail work, including the preparation of
    segment maps. It should be clearly understood that the
    completion of this work will be critical to any significant
    future appropriations.
        In addition, the Committee strongly encourages the Pacific
    Crest Trail Association to help raise significant non-Federal
    matching funds to ensure that the most critical sections which
    are threatened by development can be protected. A strong
    public/private partnership on the Pacific Crest Trail will have
    an impact on the future level of Federal support.
        Therefore, the Committee directs the Secretary of
    Agriculture, who has overall responsibility for administration
    of this trail, to work in close consultation with the Secretary
    of the Interior and the Pacific Crest Trail Association to
    identify, assess and prioritize the needs of the trail
    including the preparation of segment maps as was done with the
    Appalachian National Scenic Trail. The Forest Service should
    report to the Committee no later than March 1, 2000 on their
    plans for accomplishing this work.
        The Committee has included bill language making permanent
    the existing mineral withdrawal within the New World Mining
    District, MT.

            acquisition of lands for National forests, special acts

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................        $1,069,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................         1,069,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................         1,069,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        The Committee recommends $1,069,000 for acquisition of
    lands for National forests, special acts, the same as the
    budget request and the same as in 1999. These funds are used
    pursuant to several special acts which authorize appropriations
    from the receipts of specified National Forests for the
    purchase of lands to minimize erosion and flood damage to
    critical watersheds needing soil stabilization and vegetative
    cover.

                acquisition of lands to complete land exchanges

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................          $210,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................           210,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................           210,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        The Committee recommends $210,000 for acquisition of lands
    to complete land exchanges under the Act of December 4, 1967
    (16 U.S.C. 484a). Under the Act, deposits made by public school
    districts or public school authorities to provide for cash
    equalization of certain land exchanges can be appropriated to
    acquire similar lands suitable for National Forest System
    purposes in the same State as the National Forest lands
    conveyed in the exchanges.

                             range betterment fund

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................        $3,300,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................         3,300,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................         3,300,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        The Committee recommends $3,300,000, the budget request,
    for the range betterment fund, to be derived from grazing
    receipts from the National Forests (Public Law 94-579, as
    amended) and to be used for range rehabilitation, protection,
    and improvements including seeding, reseeding, fence
    construction, weed control, water development, and fish and
    wildlife habitat enhancement in 16 western States.

        gifts, donations and bequests for forest and rangeland research

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................           $92,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................            92,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................            92,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        The Committee recommends $92,000, the budget estimate, for
    gifts, donations and bequests for forest and rangeland
    research. Authority for the program is contained in Public Law
    95-307 (16 U.S.C. 1643, section 4(b)). Amounts appropriated and
    not needed for current operations may be invested in public
    debt securities. Both the principal and earnings from the
    receipts are available to the Forest Service.

                              DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

                             Clean Coal Technology

        The Committee has agreed to defer $190,000,000 in
    previously appropriated Clean Coal Technology budget authority
    until fiscal year 2001 instead of a $256 million deferral over
    three years as proposed by the Administration. To the extent
    funds are not needed because of premature project terminations,
    the Committee will continue its practice of rescinding excess
    funds. The Committee believes more substantial deferrals or
    rescissions are not warranted at this time.
        The Committee agrees to the following:
        1. Up to $14 million may be used for administration of the
    clean coal technology program in fiscal year 2000.
        2. The Committee does not object to the continued support
    of the U.S./China Energy and Environmental Center, which
    promotes the use of American energy technology that will
    greatly reduce emissions and improve energy efficiency.

                     fossil energy research and development

        The fossil energy programs of the Department of Energy make
    prudent investments in long-range research and development that
    help protect the environment through higher efficiency power
    generation, advanced production technologies and improved
    compliance and stewardship operations. These activities
    safeguard our domestic energy security. This country will
    continue to rely on fossil fuels for the majority of its energy
    requirements for the foreseeable future, and the activities
    funded through the fossil energy research and development
    account ensure that fossil energy technologies continue to
    improve with respect to emissions reduction and control and
    energy efficiency.
        Fossil fuels, especially coal, are this country's most
    abundant and lowest cost fuels for electric power generation.
    They are why this country enjoys the lowest cost electricity of
    any industrialized economy. The prospects for technology
    advances for coal and other fossil fuels are just as bright as
    those for alternative energy sources such as solar, wind and
    geothermal. Programs funded under this account are working
    toward the goal of developing virtually pollution-free power
    plants within the next 15 or 20 years and doubling the amount
    of electricity produced from the same amount of fuel.

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $384,056,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................       340,000,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................       335,292,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................       -48,764,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -4,708,000

        The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the
    budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

        The Committee recommends $335,292,000 for fossil energy
    research and development, a decrease of $4,708,000 below the
    budget request and $48,764,000 below the fiscal year 1999
    level.
        Coal.--The Committee recommends $124,482,000 for coal
    research, an increase of $2,050,000 above the budget request.
    Changes to the budget request include a decrease of $4,950,000
    in advanced clean efficient power systems and an increase of
    $7,000,000 for a steelmaking feedstock program. The decrease
    referenced above represents the transfer of funds from the high
    efficiency integrated gasified combined cycle program for fuel
    cells to the fuel cell program.
        Natural Gas.--The Committee recommends $27,457,000 for
    natural gas research, a decrease of $40,208,000 below the
    budget request. Changes to the budget request include a
    decrease of $41,808,000 for advanced turbine systems, of which
    $800,000 is for the midsize turbines program under Vision 21
    and $41,008,000 is transferred to the energy conservation
    account to consolidate turbine program funding in that account,
    and increases of $1,000,000 in exploration and production/
    advanced drilling, completion and simulation for a laser
    drilling program and $600,000 in effective environmental
    protection/outreach and technology transfer for National
    laboratory partnerships.
        Fuel Cells.--The Committee recommends $44,599,000 for fuel
    cell research, an increase of $6,950,000 above the budget
    request. Changes to the budget request include increases of
    $4,950,000 for fuel cells development which is transferred from
    advanced clean efficient power systems in the coal area and
    $2,000,000 to continue the multilayer ceramic technology
    program.
        Oil Technology.--The Committee recommends $54,666,000 for
    oil technology research, an increase of $4,500,000 above the
    budget request for recovery field demonstrations to expand the
    preferred petroleum upstream management practices program.
        Gasification.--The Committee recommends $9,000,000 for a
    black liquor gasification program which the Administration
    proposed to fund in the Energy Conservation account. The
    Committee believes strongly that the fossil energy program and,
    in particular, the Federal Energy Technology Center, has the
    expertise to oversee this program as it has been responsible
    for gasification efforts in the past. The industries of the
    future program in Energy Conservation should provide assistance
    as necessary to fossil energy.
        Cooperative Research and Development.--The Committee
    recommends $6,836,000, an increase of $1,000,000 above the
    budget request, for cooperative research and development. The
    recommended funding is equivalent to the 1999 level.
        Environmental Restoration.--The Committee recommends
    $10,000,000, equal to the budget request, for environmental
    restoration.
        Fuels Program.--The Committee recommends $2,173,000, the
    budget request, for the fuels conversion, natural gas and
    electricity program.
        Headquarters Program Direction.--The Committee recommends
    $16,016,000, the budget request, for headquarters program
    direction.
        Energy Technology Center Program Direction.--The Committee
    recommends $57,063,000 for energy technology center program
    direction, an increase of $1,000,000 above the budget request.
    The increase is for contract services.
        General Plant Projects.--The Committee recommends
    $2,000,000, the budget request for general plant projects.
        Mining.--The Committee recommends $5,000,000, the budget
    request, for the mining/advanced metallurgical processes
    program.
        Other.--The Committee has not agreed to the use of
    $11,000,000 in prior year funds to offset fossil requirements
    in fiscal year 2000 but has agreed to the use of $24,000,000 in
    funds from the Biomass Energy Development account as a partial
    offset to fossil energy research and development funding. The
    Committee does not object to the use of up to $1,500,000 in
    prior year funds to complete the direct liquefaction program
    with Hydrocarbon Technologies Inc.
        The Committee agrees to the following:
        1. The Committee expects the Department to focus its Vision
    21 activities on critical electric power generation
    technologies, including integrated gasification combined cycle,
    pressurized fluidized bed combustion and fuel cells based on
    syngas.
        2. The Department, in coordination with the fossil energy
    and energy conservation programs, should report to the
    Committee by December 15, 1999 on advanced materials work,
    including high temperature steel alloys and ceramics for large-
    scale power applications. The report should include a
    description of each project, year-by-year funding levels for
    each project and intended applications of each technology.
        3. The Department should work closely with industry to
    ensure that technology research and development is consistent
    with industry roadmapping efforts such as those of the Electric
    Power Research Institute and the Coal Utilization Research
    Council.
        4. The increase of $2,000,000 in the fuel cell program for
    multilayer ceramic technology is to continue work with
    McDermott Technology, Inc. on the development of this
    technology; provided the company provides matching funds.
        5. The Committee expects the Department to address the
    House Science Committee's recommendations in preparing the
    fiscal year 2001 budget request for Fossil Energy Research and
    Development.
        6. The turbine program funding is consolidated in Energy
    Conservation, but Fossil Energy should continue to manage its
    portions of the program.
        7. The Committee encourages continued coordination with
    States and industry to ensure research is meaningful and not
    duplicative.
        8. The funding provided for a steelmaking feedstock program
    is contingent on at least a dollar-for-dollar cost share with
    industry partners.
        9. Funding is provided in the energy conservation account
    for a reciprocating engines research program. The Committee
    expects the fossil energy program to coordinate closely with
    the industries of the future program on reciprocating engine
    research. The Committee does not object to this research being
    conducted under the fossil energy account if that proves to be
    more appropriate.
        10. The Committee is aware of a proposed demonstration
    project by Public Service Electric & Gas, based in Newark, New
    Jersey, that involves mercury emissions control technology for
    coal fired power plants and encourages the Department to
    examine this proposal and report to the Committee on what is
    involved, cost estimates and recommendations for pursuing this
    effort.
        11. The Committee continues to support the Department's
    efforts to develop and implement a multi-agency and public and
    private sector research and development partnership initiative
    for methane hydrates. This effort should continue to be
    coordinated by DOE and involve the Department of Interior's
    Geological Survey, the Minerals Management Service (MMS), the
    Department of Defense's Naval Research Laboratory, and the
    applied expertise of multiple universities in partnership with
    industry. The Gulf of Mexico Hydrate Research Consortium
    program, managed by the Center for Marine Resources and
    Environmental Technology, is an applied academic research arm
    of the MMS which has already begun to develop such a multi-
    agency public/private partnership initiative for methane
    hydrates. The Committee encourages the Department to consider
    using the consortium's expertise in this area.
        12. The funding provided for PM 2.5 monitoring and research
    is for data monitoring and development of cost effective
    control technologies or source production science. Also, the
    Committee encourages the Department to continue its monitoring
    efforts in the Southeast.
        13. The Committee understands that the Department's review
    of the use of ramjet technology from the aerospace industry for
    electric power generation has yielded some promising
    possibilities. The Committee asks that the Department provide a
    cost analysis for such a project by October 31, 1999 and
    incorporate it in its budget priorities for fiscal year 2001.

                          alternative fuels production

                         (including transfer of funds)

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       -$1,300,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        -1,000,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        -1,000,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................          +300,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        The Committee recommends the deposit of investment income
    earned as of October 1, 1999, on principal amounts in a trust
    fund established as part of the sale of the Great Plains
    Gasification Plant in Beulah, ND, into this account and
    immediate transfer of the funds to the General Fund of the
    Treasury. The amount available as of October 1, 1999, is
    estimated to be $1,000,000.

                     naval petroleum and oil shale reserves

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $14,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................                 0
    Recommended, 2000.....................................                 0
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................       -14,000,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the
    budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

        The Committee recommends no new funding for the operation
    of the naval petroleum and oil shale reserves and agrees with
    the Administration's proposal to fund this program through the
    use of available prior year funds.

                          elk hills school lands fund

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $36,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        36,000,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        36,000,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        The Committee recommends $36,000,000 for the Elk Hills
    school lands fund, which is equal to both the budget request
    and the 1999 level. This represents the second of seven
    payments to the fund, which was established as a part of the
    sale of the Elk Hills Naval Petroleum Reserve in California, in
    order to settle school lands claims by the State.

                              energy conservation

        The energy conservation program of the Department of Energy
    funds cooperative research and development projects aimed at
    sustaining economic growth through more efficient energy use.
    Activities financed through this program focus on markedly
    improving existing technologies as well as developing new
    technologies, which ultimately will displace some of our
    reliance on traditional fossil fuels.

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $691,701,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................       812,515,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................       693,822,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................        +2,121,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................      -118,693,000

        The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the
    budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

        The Committee recommends $693,822,000 for energy
    conservation, a decrease of $118,693,000 below the budget
    request and an increase of $2,121,000 above the fiscal year
    1999 level. Changes to the budget request are detailed below.
        Buildings.--The Committee recommends $250,480,000 for the
    building technology State and community sector program, a
    decrease of $85,401,000 below the budget request. Changes to
    the budget request are shown in the following table:

    Buildings/Research and Standards:
        Technology roadmaps & competitive R&D (1999 level)..      -1,115,000
        Residential building integration:
            Terminate home energy rating systems............      -1,535,000
            Building America (increase above 1999)..........      +2,000,000
            1999 level for other programs...................      -3,956,000
        Commercial building integration (1999 level)........      -3,781,000
        Equipment, materials and tools:
            Lighting and appliance standards (increase above
              1999).........................................      +2,000,000
            1999 level for other programs...................     -17,786,000
                        --------------------------------------------------------
                        ____________________________________________________
              Subtotal, Buildings Research and Standards....     -24,173,000
                        ========================================================
                        ____________________________________________________
    Building Technology Assistance:
        Weatherization assistance program...................     -34,000,000
        State energy program (1999 level)...................      -4,000,000
        Community partnerships:
            Terminate municipal energy management...........      -1,566,000
            1999 level for other programs...................     -16,599,000
        Energy star program (1999 level)....................      -3,276,000
                        --------------------------------------------------------
                        ____________________________________________________
          Subtotal, Building Technology Assistance..........     -59,441,000
                        ========================================================
                        ____________________________________________________
    Management and Planning:
        Evaluation, planning & analysis.....................      -1,787,000

        Federal Energy Management Program.--The Committee
    recommends $23,918,000 for the Federal energy management
    program, a decrease of $7,950,000 below the budget request and
    an increase for program direction of $100,000 for Regional
    Support Offices above the fiscal year 1999 level. Changes to
    the budget request are shown in the following table:

    Program Activities......................................      -7,250,000
    Program Direction.......................................        -700,000

        Industry.--The Committee recommends $193,508,000 for
    industry sector programs, an increase of $22,508,000 above the
    budget request. Changes to the budget request are shown in the
    following table:

    Industries of the Future (Specific):
        Black liquor gasification (transfer to fossil
          energy)...........................................      -9,000,000
    Industries of the Future (Crosscutting):
        Industrial power generation (turbines)..............      -7,000,000
        Technical assistance/integrated delivery............      -2,000,000
        Utility turbines (transfer from fossil energy)......     +41,008,000
    Management & Planning:
        Evaluation and planning.............................        -500,000

        Transportation.--The Committee recommends $208,450,000 for
    transportation research, a decrease of $43,650,000 below the
    budget request. Changes to the budget request are shown in the
    following table:

    Vehicle Technology:
        Hybrid systems:
            High power energy storage.......................      -2,000,000
            Advanced power electronics......................      -2,000,000
            Heavy vehicle propulsion systems................      -6,000,000
        Fuel cells:
            Fuel cell systems...............................      -2,000,000
            Fuel processor/storage..........................      -7,000,000
        Advanced combustion engine:
            Hybrid direct injection.........................      -5,000,000
            Combustion & after treatment....................      -5,000,000
        Cooperative automotive research (CARAT).............      -7,000,000
        Electric vehicles/long-term battery research........      -2,000,000
        Heavy vehicle systems...............................      -2,000,000
                        --------------------------------------------------------
                        ____________________________________________________
          Subtotal, Vehicle Technology......................     -40,000,000
                        ========================================================
                        ____________________________________________________
    Fuels Utilization:
        Advanced petroleum based fuels:
            Light trucks....................................      -3,000,000
            Heavy trucks....................................      -3,000,000
                        --------------------------------------------------------
                        ____________________________________________________
              Subtotal, Fuels Utilization...................      -6,000,000
                        ========================================================
                        ____________________________________________________
    Materials Technologies:
        Lightweight materials...............................      +5,000,000
        Heavy vehicle high strength weight reduction........      +2,000,000
        HTML/electron microscope............................      +1,500,000
                        --------------------------------------------------------
                        ____________________________________________________
          Subtotal, Materials Technologies..................      +8,500,000
                        ========================================================
                        ____________________________________________________
    Technology Deployment:
        Clean cities........................................      -3,000,000
        Testing and evaluation..............................      -1,000,000
        EPACT replacement fuels.............................        -700,000
        Advanced vehicle competitions.......................        -150,000
                        --------------------------------------------------------
                        ____________________________________________________
          Subtotal, Technology Deployment...................      -4,850,000
                        ========================================================
                        ____________________________________________________
    Management & Planning:
        Technology assessment & analysis....................        -800,000
        Program direction...................................        -500,000
                        --------------------------------------------------------
                        ____________________________________________________
          Subtotal, Management & Planning...................      -1,300,000
                        ========================================================
                        ____________________________________________________

        Policy and Management.--The Committee recommends
    $42,466,000 for policy and management, a decrease of $4,200,000
    below the budget request. Changes to the budget request are
    shown in the following table:

    Policy and Management:
        Headquarters contract services:
            Contract support................................      -1,000,000
            Crosscutting support............................        -500,000
        Regional support office contract services...........      -2,000,000
        International market development:
            Energy & environmental security.................        -700,000

        The Committee has agreed to the use of $25,000,000 from the
    Biomass Energy Development account to offset partially new
    funding requirements for energy conservation programs.
        The Committee agrees to the following:
        1. None of the funds provided herein are for the million
    solar roofs initiative. This program is under the purview of
    the Energy & Water Appropriations Subcommittee.
        2. Fiscal year 2000 funding has not been offset by the use
    of prior year unobligated and unexpended balances. Some
    progress has been made in reducing these carryover balances and
    every effort should be made to ensure that progress continues.
        3. The National Academy of Public Administration is
    reviewing the financial management and contracting practices of
    the Energy Conservation program. The Committee expects the
    Department to work closely with NAPA on identifying problems
    and recommended solutions. The fiscal year 2001 budget request
    should reflect program adjustments consistent with NAPA
    recommendations.
        4. The Department has not been following the Committee's
    reprogramming guidelines for Energy Conservation programs. The
    Department should review carefully and revise its practices to
    ensure full compliance with reprogramming requirements. In
    addition, specific, stricter guidance for fiscal year 2000
    programs in the buildings area and the heavy vehicles area is
    provided below. Quarterly accounting reports to the Committee
    of adjustments between and among programs should be
    discontinued.
        5. The Department needs to continue and intensify its
    efforts to consolidate and streamline the buildings research
    program. The budget request for fiscal year 2000 does not
    provide sufficient information for informed decisionmaking by
    the Congress. The answers to Committee questions do little to
    improve upon the insufficient budget justification. The fiscal
    year 2001 budget structure should not be changed and the budget
    justification should indicate clearly narrative and funding
    comparisons for each individual program.
        6. As part of the buildings program consolidation, the
    Committee urges the Department to continue and expand its use
    of broad-based R&D solicitations that cut across the various
    project areas, and the Department should greatly curtail its
    practice of continuing specific projects from year-to-year
    without competition.
        7. Funding for building sector programs should be continued
    at the fiscal year 1999 level, including the oil heat research
    and development program, unless expressly provided to the
    contrary herein. Any other realignment of funds from 1999
    levels must be approved by the Committee following the
    established reprogramming procedures.
        8. Funding for the weatherization assistance program is
    contingent on a 25 percent cost share from each participating
    State. The Committee understands that not all States will be
    able to meet this requirement quickly. The Committee urges the
    Department to work with each State to ensure that funds are
    made available as soon as the cost-sharing requirement is met.
    The Committee notes that these funds are typically not
    distributed to the States until late in the fiscal year and
    that they are ``no year'' funds and therefore will not expire
    if individual States are unable to meet the cost sharing
    requirement in a timely manner. The $120 million provided in
    this bill in addition to the minimum $30 million in State cost
    sharing will result in at least $150 million for the
    weatherization program as compared with the $154 million in the
    Administration's request. The Committee notes that each State
    is projected to have a funding surplus in fiscal year 1999.
    Twenty-one States had a surplus in excess of 10 percent of
    annual spending in fiscal year 1998 and 13 States had a surplus
    in excess of $1 billion each in fiscal year 1998.
    Weatherization assistance should be supported at the State and
    local levels in addition to receiving Federal support.
        9. The Federal Energy Management Program needs to focus on
    getting delivery orders processed in a timely manner and
    demonstrate proven results prior to any program expansion. It
    should not take more than a couple months to process these
    orders and the Committee understands that it is currently
    taking 12 months.
        10. The funding provided for heavy duty vehicle research
    may not be used to duplicate, compete or conflict with the
    joint consortia program financed through the Departments of
    Transportation and Defense. The Department should coordinate
    with the consortia on the use of these funds to ensure that
    each proposal is distinct from or complementary to consortia
    efforts. Prior to the commitment of any funds in this area the
    Department should receive Committee approval for the use of
    these funds following the existing reprogramming procedures.
        11. Funding for advanced turbine research is consolidated
    in the industry program, but Fossil Energy should continue to
    manage its portions of the program.
        12. The Committee provided additional funding to accelerate
    the energy conservation industrial turbine program in fiscal
    year 1999 and, the 2000 funds recommended should be sufficient
    to complete this program.
        13. Of the funds provided above the 1999 level for
    distributed generation in the industries of the future
    crosscutting activity, $2,000,000 is to study the feasibility
    of initiating a program to improve the efficiency of
    reciprocating engines. The Committee expects the energy
    conservation program to coordinate closely with Fossil Energy
    on reciprocating engine research. The Committee does not object
    to this research being conducted under the fossil energy
    account if that proves to be more appropriate.
        14. Natural gas vehicle research funding for fiscal year
    2000 is $11,100,000 and is to be used for programs determined
    in coordination with industry.
        15. The Committee strongly encourages the Department to use
    FETC expertise in the energy conservation area.
        16. The Northwest Alliance for Transportation Technologies
    should be funded at least at the $3,000,000 level in fiscal
    year 2000.
        17. Grants to States within the 3 different sector programs
    should be closely coordinated with the program managers within
    each of those sectors.
        18. The Committee expects the Department to address the
    House Science Committee's recommendations in developing the
    2001 budget request.
        19. The Committee encourages continued and increased
    coordination, with States and industry to ensure research is
    meaningful and not duplicative. The Committee suggests that one
    area worthy of consideration for coordination with the States
    is alternative fuel school bus projects.
        20. Within the industries of the future/petroleum refining
    program, the Department should consider cost-shared research on
    biocatalytic desulfurization.
        21. The Committee encourages the Department to work with
    the steel industry within the Partnership for a New Generation
    of Vehicles (PNGV) program. Industry reports that a 2,000 pound
    steel-bodied car is an achievable goal. The Committee further
    encourages the Department to continue the original PNGV goals
    with respect to design, performance, recyclability,
    affordability, and safety.
        Bill Language.--Language is included requiring a 25 percent
    State cost share for the weatherization assistance program.
    This issue is discussed in more detail above.

                              economic regulation

        The economic regulation account funds the independent
    Office of Hearings and Appeals which is responsible for all of
    the Department's adjudication processes except those that are
    the responsibility of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
    The amount funded by this Committee is for those activities
    specific to this bill: mainly those related to petroleum
    overcharge cases. All other activities are funded on a
    reimbursable basis from the other elements of the Department of
    Energy. Prior to fiscal year 1997, this account also funded the
    Economic Regulatory Administration.

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................        $1,801,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................         2,000,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................         2,000,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................          +199,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        The Committee recommends $2,000,000 for economic
    regulation, equal to the budget request and an increase of
    $199,000 above the fiscal year 1999 level.

                          strategic petroleum reserve

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $160,120,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................       159,000,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................       159,000,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................        -1,120,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        The Committee recommends $159,000,000 for operation of the
    Strategic Petroleum Reserve which is equal to the budget
    request and a decrease of $1,120,000 below the fiscal year 1999
    level.

                             SPR Petroleum Account

        The Committee has not agreed to appropriate $5,000,000 in
    additional funds for the SPR Petroleum Account. Instead, the
    Committee has included transfer authority under Administrative
    Provisions, Department of Energy for use in the event a
    drawdown is necessary.

                       energy information administration

        The Energy Information Administration is a quasi-
    independent agency within the Department of Energy established
    to provide timely, objective, and accurate energy-related
    information to the Congress, executive branch, State
    governments, industry, and the public. The information and
    analysis prepared by the EIA is widely disseminated and the
    agency is recognized as an unbiased source of energy
    information by government organizations, industry, professional
    statistical organizations and the public.

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $70,500,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        72,644,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        72,644,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................        +2,144,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        The Committee recommends $72,644,000, the budget request,
    for the Energy Information Administration, an increase of
    $2,144,000 above the fiscal year 1999 level.

                administrative provisions, department of energy

        Bill language is recommended in Administrative Provisions,
    Department of Energy, providing authority for the Department to
    borrow from Department of Energy accounts in this bill in the
    event a Strategic Petroleum Reserve drawdown is necessary and
    requiring that borrowed funds be paid back with oil sale
    receipts.

                    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

                             Indian Health Service

                             indian health services

        The provision of Federal health services to Indians is
    based on a special relationship between Indian tribes and the
    U.S. Government first set forth in the 1830's by the U.S.
    Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Marshall. Numerous
    treaties, statutes, constitutional provisions, and
    international law have reconfirmed this relationship. Principal
    among these is the Snyder Act of 1921 which provides the basic
    authority for most Indian health services provided by the
    Federal Government to American Indians and Alaska Natives. The
    Indian Health Service (IHS) provides direct health care
    services in 37 hospitals, 60 health centers, 3 school health
    centers, and 46 health stations. Tribes and tribal groups,
    through contracts with the IHS, operate 12 hospitals, 149
    health centers, 4 school health centers, and 233 health
    stations (including 158 Alaska village clinics). The IHS,
    tribes and tribal groups also operate 7 regional youth
    substance abuse treatment centers and more than 2,100 units of
    staff quarters.

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................    $1,950,322,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................     2,094,922,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................     2,085,407,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................      +135,085,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -9,515,000

        The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the
    budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

        The Committee recommends $2,085,407,000 for Indian health
    services, a decrease of $9,515,000 below the budget request and
    an increase of $135,085,000 above the fiscal year 1999 level.
        Hospitals and clinics.--The Committee recommends
    $1,005,610,000 for hospitals and clinics, an increase of
    $2,758,000 above the budget request and $56,470,000 above the
    fiscal year 1999 level. Increases to the budget request include
    $4,900,000 for physician pay, $6,064,000 for other pay and
    inflation, $994,000 for staffing, operations and start-up costs
    at new facilities of which $415,000 is for the Hopi, AZ clinic
    and $579,000 is for Talihina, OK, $1,000,000 for diabetes
    screening through the Joslin program, $400,000 for a pharmacist
    residency program, and $400,000 for infant mortality research
    for the Shoalwater Bay Tribe, WA. These increases are offset
    partially by decreases of $6,000,000 for a women's health
    initiative and $5,000,000 for information systems.
        Dental health.--The Committee recommends $78,783,000 for
    dental health, a decrease of $5,577,000 below the budget
    request and an increase of $7,383,000 above the fiscal year
    1999 level. Changes to the budget request include an increase
    of $423,000 for pay and inflation and a decrease of $6,000,000
    for program expansion. The Committee notes that there is still
    a sizable program increase above the 1999 level to expand much
    needed dental services.
        Mental health.--The Committee recommends $43,794,000 for
    mental health services, a decrease of $4,652,000 below the
    budget request and an increase of $2,489,000 above the fiscal
    year 1999 level. Changes to the budget request include an
    increase of $348,000 for pay and inflation and a decrease of
    $5,000,000 for program expansion. The Committee expects the
    Service to distribute the program increase above the 1999 level
    to a limited number of projects rather than distributing it
    equally to all tribes. Such an approach will enable the Service
    to focus on the most pressing needs.
        Alcohol and substance abuse.--The Committee recommends
    $97,024,000 for alcohol and substance abuse treatment and
    prevention programs, an increase of $698,000 above the budget
    request and $2,344,000 above the fiscal year 1999 level.
    Changes to the budget request include an increase of $1,698,000
    for pay and inflation and a decrease of $1,000,000 for program
    expansion.
        Contract health care.--The Committee recommends
    $407,290,000 for contract care, a decrease of $3,152,000 below
    the budget request and an increase of $21,489,000 above the
    fiscal year 1999 level. Changes to the budget request include
    an increase of $6,848,000 for pay and inflation and a decrease
    of $10,000,000 for program expansion.
        Public health nursing.--The Committee recommends
    $33,526,000 for public health nursing, a decrease of $6,837,000
    below the budget request and an increase of $3,163,000 above
    the fiscal year 1999 level. Changes to the budget request
    include an increase of $163,000 for pay and inflation and a
    decrease of $7,000,000 for program expansion.
        Health education.--The Committee recommends $9,654,000 for
    health education, an increase for pay and inflation of $113,000
    above the budget request and $224,000 above the fiscal year
    1999 level.
        Community health representatives.--The Committee recommends
    $47,826,000 for community health representatives, an increase
    of $6,866,000 above the budget request and $1,866,000 above the
    fiscal year 1999 level. Increases include $5,000,000 to restore
    the base program and $1,866,000 for pay and inflation.
        The Committee has not agreed with the Administration's
    proposal to reduce the community health representative program.
    The Committee believes this is an important, essential
    component of the IHS system and notes that, in some instances,
    the local CHR is the only health professional who certain
    patients ever see.
        Immunization.--The Committee recommends $1,407,000 for the
    immunization program in Alaska, an increase of $19,000 above
    the budget request and $40,000 above the fiscal year 1999
    level. The increase is for pay and inflation costs.
        Urban health.--The Committee recommends $27,849,000 for
    urban health projects, a decrease of $1,533,000 below the
    budget request and an increase of $1,467,000 above the fiscal
    year 1999 level. The change to the budget request includes an
    increase of $467,000 for pay and inflation and a decrease of
    $2,000,000 for program expansion.
        Indian health professions.--The Committee recommends
    $30,728,000 for Indian health professions, an increase of
    $1,028,000 above the budget request and $1,105,000 above the
    fiscal year 1999 level for pay and inflation costs.
        Tribal management.--The Committee recommends $2,418,000 for
    tribal management, an increase of $28,000 above both the budget
    request and the fiscal year 1999 level for inflation costs.
        Direct operations.--The Committee recommends $51,145,000
    for direct operations, an increase of $545,000 above the budget
    request and $1,836,000 above the fiscal year 1999 level. The
    increase is for pay and inflation costs.
        Self-governance.--The Committee recommends $9,572,000 for
    self-governance, an increase of $181,000 above both the budget
    request and the fiscal year 1999 level. The increase is for
    inflation costs.
        Contract support costs.--The Committee recommends
    $238,781,000 for contract support costs, which is equal to the
    budget request and an increase of $35,000,000 above the fiscal
    year 1999 level. The increase above the 1999 level reflects a
    different distribution than assumed in the budget request and
    includes $30,000,000 for existing contacts and $5,000,000 for
    new and expanded contracts and is provided contingent on a pro-
    rata distribution of funds across all self-determination
    contracts and self-governance compacts.
        The Committee has recommended bill language earmarking the
    amount of funding for contract support costs and requiring a
    proportional distribution of contract support cost funding. The
    $30,000,000 increase for existing contracts is recommended to
    minimize decreases to ongoing contracts and compacts under a
    pro-rata distribution.
        The Committee agrees to the following:
        1. The Service needs to address contract support cost
    shortfalls in a manner that ensures that increases in this
    program are not at the expense of badly needed increases in
    direct health care programs. Contract support cost funding
    provided last year and in this year's recommendation amounts to
    more than a 40 percent increase over two years. The Committee
    cannot afford to continue such large funding increases for this
    program at the same time as addressing the many critical
    shortfalls in funding for direct health care programs.
        2. The Service should continue to work with the tribes to
    develop level of need calculations for health care services.
        3. The Committee is concerned about the high rate of
    amputations among Native Americans. The Service should develop
    a meaningful plan of action to augment and strengthen its
    podiatry care program and address the shortage of commissioned
    officers in the podiatry field. The IHS should work with other
    institutions, including the American Podiatric Medical
    Association, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and
    the National Institutes of Health in developing this plan.
        4. The Committee continues to be concerned about the infant
    mortality crisis in the Shoalwater Bay Tribe and expects the
    Service to work closely with the tribe, the State, the Centers
    for Disease Control and Prevention and other agencies to
    identify the causes of and potential solutions for infant
    mortality.
        5. The Service should use the funds provided for a pharmacy
    residency program to establish immediately such a program,
    which will help address the critical shortage of pharmacists in
    the Service.
        6. The Service should notify the Committee of how it
    proposes to distribute the program funding above the 1999 level
    for each activity no later than December 15, 1999. This
    includes increases in both the services and the facilities
    accounts. Program funding increases should not be distributed
    across all tribes but should be subject to competitive
    solicitations and awarded to a limited number of projects that
    focus on highest priority needs in each program area.
        Bill language.--Language is recommended limiting the amount
    of funding that can be spent on contract support costs for
    existing contracts and for new and expanded contracts. Language
    also is included stipulating that new and expanded contracts
    are subject to a pro-rata distribution.
        Language is also included under Administrative Provisions,
    Indian Health Service requiring a proportional distribution of
    contract support cost funding across all self-determination and
    self-governance contracts and compacts.

                            indian health facilities

        The need for new Indian health care facilities has not been
    fully quantified but it is safe to say that many billions of
    dollars would be required to renovate existing facilities and
    construct all the needed new hospitals and clinics. In 1994,
    IHS conducted a review of facility needs to determine what
    would be required to provide adequate and safe health care
    delivery. The conclusions of the review were that IHS would
    need to replace, renovate or modernize 41 hospitals, 153 full
    service health centers, and 289 part-time health stations, and
    that 12 new health centers and 21 new health stations would
    need to be constructed. Safe and sanitary water and sewer
    systems for existing homes and solid waste disposal needs
    currently are estimated to amount to over $600 million for
    those projects that are considered to be economically feasible.

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $291,965,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................       317,465,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................       312,478,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................       +20,513,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -4,987,000

        The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the
    budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

        The Committee recommends $312,478,000 for Indian health
    facilities, a decrease of $4,987,000 below the budget request
    and an increase of $20,513,000 above the fiscal year 1999
    level. Changes to the budget request are discussed below.
        Maintenance and improvement.--The Committee recommends
    $43,504,000 for maintenance and improvement, a decrease of
    $4,621,000 below the budget request and $2,879,000 above the
    fiscal year 1999 level. Changes to the budget request include
    an increase of $379,000 for pay and inflation and a decrease of
    $5,000,000 for program expansion.
        Sanitation facilities.--The Committee recommends
    $90,688,000 for sanitation facilities, a decrease of $2,196,000
    below the budget request and increase of $1,360,000 above the
    fiscal year 1999 level. Changes to the budget request include
    an increase of $804,000 for pay and inflation and a decrease of
    $3,000,000 for program expansion.
        Construction.--The Committee recommends $49,803,000 for
    construction, an increase of $7,272,000 above the budget
    request and $11,216,000 above the fiscal year 1999 level.
    Changes to the budget request include increases of $3,000,000
    for staff quarters at Hopi, AZ, $10,000,000 to begin
    construction of the Winnebago, NE hospital and $1,000,000 for
    Zuni staff quarters, and decreases of $1,728,000 for modular
    dental units and $5,000,000 for the Fort Defiance, AZ hospital.
        Facilities and environmental health support.--The Committee
    recommends $114,096,000 for facilities and environmental health
    support, a decrease of $5,586,000 below the budget request and
    an increase of $6,414,000 above the fiscal year 1999 level.
    Changes to the budget request include an increase of $414,000
    for pay and inflation and a decrease of $6,000,000 for program
    expansion.
        Equipment.--The Committee recommends $14,387,000 for
    equipment, an increase of $144,000 above the budget request and
    $1,144,000 above the fiscal year 1999 level. The increase above
    the budget request is for inflation costs.
        The Committee agrees to the following:
        1. Funding to complete quarters construction associated
    with the new Hopi clinic is provided to ensure that this
    project can be completed successfully. The Committee notes that
    the majority of the funding for the quarters construction is
    being borne by the tribe.
        2. The Service should consider a new, consistent approach
    to constructing staff quarters that involves cost sharing by
    the tribes to the extent possible and tribal operation of the
    completed quarters. Funding for quarters construction needs to
    be treated consistently for each project. Currently there are
    quarters projects that have never been built although the
    related hospital or clinic was built; projects that incorporate
    the cost of quarters in with the total cost of the facility
    construction (with no tribal cost share); and projects that are
    left to an individual tribe to fund.
        3. The fiscal year 2001 budget should address the
    advisability of reinstituting a joint venture facilities
    construction program in the context of overall priorities. The
    Committee notes that this is another area of need that has
    ``fallen through the cracks'' as funding increases have
    concentrated on addressing the contract support cost shortfall.
        4. The methodology used to distribute facilities funding
    should address the fluctuating annual workload and maintain
    parity among IHS areas and tribes as the workload shifts.
        5. Funds for sanitation facilities for new and renovated
    housing should be used to serve housing provided by the Bureau
    of Indian Affairs Housing Improvement Program, new homes and
    homes renovated to like-new condition. Onsite sanitation
    facilities may also be provided for homes occupied by the
    disabled or sick who have physician referrals indicating an
    immediate medical need for adequate sanitation facilities at
    home.
        6. Sanitation funds should not be used to provide
    sanitation facilities for new homes funded by the housing
    programs of the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
    The HUD should provide any needed funds to the IHS for that
    purpose.
        7. The IHS may use up to $5,000,000 in sanitation funding
    for projects to clean up and replace open dumps on Indian lands
    pursuant to the Indian Lands Open Dump Cleanup Act of 1994.
        8. The IHS should continue to support tribes in identifying
    and implementing alternative and innovative approaches to
    funding construction and repair and replacement of health care
    facilities throughout Indian country, including cost-sharing
    arrangements and the enhanced use of third-party collections
    for improving aging facilities. These alternative approaches
    should not result in increased operational funding requirements
    for IHS.
        9. The Tohono O'odham Nation of Arizona is interested in
    partnering with the IHS for the construction of an ambulatory
    health care facility on the western side of the Nation's
    property. This facility is currently on the priority list for
    construction. The Committee asks that the Service report no
    later than March 31, 2000 on: (1) an assessment of the need for
    this ambulatory health care facility and how it ranks within
    the current priority system; (2) the status of efforts to
    select a suitable site; and (3) the suitability of this project
    for a joint venture demonstration program.

                Administrative Provisions, Indian Health Service

        Language is recommended requiring a proportional
    distribution of contract support cost funding across all self-
    determination and self-governance contracts and compacts. The
    Committee continues to support self-determination and self-
    governance programs. These programs have enabled the tribes to
    have greater control and greater involvement in many different
    programs formerly managed by the Indian Health Service. In the
    early years of the self-determination and self-governance
    programs, funds were shifted from Federal programs to offset
    partially the administrative costs of those tribes that elected
    to take over management of IHS programs. These administrative
    costs of the tribes are known as contract support costs. The
    Committee also annually adds additional funds to the IHS budget
    to pay contract support costs. Over time, the contract support
    costs associated with self-determination contracts and self-
    governance compacts have outpaced available funding. We have
    reached a point at which we can no longer offset these costs to
    any great extent by continuing to downsize the Federal
    bureaucracy in IHS. To do so would be unfair to the many tribes
    who choose not to manage their own programs and rely on the IHS
    for program management.
        Unfortunately, implementation of the self-determination and
    self-governance programs does not result in economies of scale
    in program management since each participating tribe is
    responsible for its own management. For Federal programs, the
    IHS is able to achieve savings by grouping program management
    responsibilities and funding for a number of tribes. Over the
    past few years, the amount of funding required to pay contract
    support costs has substantially exceeded the total amount of
    management funding that would have been required under the old
    Federal system. The Committee understands that this is a
    necessary consequence of turning programs over to the tribes.
    However, the Committee cannot afford to appropriate 100% of
    contract support costs at the expense of basic program funding
    for tribes. For example, dental health services in the IHS are
    funded at less than 25% of current need. As contract support
    costs continue to increase, and overall funding remains
    relatively constant, direct health care program funding becomes
    a smaller proportion of overall funding.
        The Bureau of Indian Affairs addresses this issue by
    distributing contract support costs on a pro-rata basis. The
    Committee believes that this is the most equitable approach to
    the problem and expects the IHS to do the same in fiscal year
    2000. The approach taken by the IHS in fiscal year 1999, while
    an improvement over past practices, does not address the
    totality of the problem. The current methodology creates a two-
    tiered system under which some tribes are paid at a set percent
    of need or ``floor'' and others receive a substantially higher
    percent of need. The additional funding recommended by the
    Committee for fiscal year 2000 will help minimize the effect a
    pro-rata distribution will have on those tribes that currently
    are receiving more than the ``floor'' value.
        The Committee expects the IHS to continue to work with the
    tribes and the legislative committees of jurisdiction to find
    an acceptable solution to the contract support cost funding
    problem. The Committee believes the basic ``fairness'' question
    needs to be addressed with respect to how to distribute limited
    funds between and among the various programs and the management
    of those programs.

                             OTHER RELATED AGENCIES

                  Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation

                             salaries and expenses

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $13,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        14,000,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        13,400,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................          +400,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................          -600,000

        The dispute between the Hopi and Navajo tribes is
    centuries-old. The Hopi were the original occupants of the land
    with their origin tracing back to the Anasazi race whose
    presence is recorded back to 1150 A.D. Later in the 16th
    century the Navajo tribe began settling in this area. The
    continuous occupation of this land by the Navajo led to the
    isolation of the Hopi Reservation as an island within the area
    occupied by the Navajo. In 1882, President Arthur issued an
    Executive Order which granted the Hopi a 2.5 million acre
    reservation to be occupied by the Hopi and such other Indians
    as the Secretary of the Interior saw fit to resettle there.
    Intertribal problems arose between the larger Navajo tribe and
    the smaller Hopi tribe revolving around the question of the
    ownership of the land as well as cultural differences between
    the two tribes. Efforts to resolve these conflicts were not
    successful and led Congress to pass legislation in 1958 which
    authorized a lawsuit to determine ownership of the land. When
    attempts at mediation of the dispute as specified in an Act
    passed in 1974 failed, the district court in Arizona
    partitioned the Joint Use Area equally between the Navajo and
    Hopi tribes under a decree that has required the relocation of
    members of both tribes. Most of those to be relocated are
    Navajo living on the Hopi Partitioned Land.
        At this time approximately 455 households remain to be
    relocated, of which 72 are full-time residents on the Hopi
    Partitioned Land. A total of 3,042 families have been relocated
    from the Hopi Partitioned Land.
        The Committee recommends an appropriation of $13,400,000
    for salaries and expenses of the Office of Navajo and Hopi
    Indian Relocation, which is an increase from the 1999 level of
    $400,000 and a decrease of $600,000 below the budget request.

        Institute of American Indian and Alaska Native Culture and Arts
                                  Development

                            payment to the institute

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................        $4,250,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................         4,250,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................                 0
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................        -4,250,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -4,250,000

        The Committee recommends zero funding for the Institute of
    American Indian and Alaska Native Culture and Arts Development.
    It was the understanding of the House that fiscal year 1999
    would be the last year Federal funding would be provided.

                            Smithsonian Institution

        The Smithsonian Institution is unique in the Federal
    establishment. Established by the Congress in 1846 to carry out
    the trust included in James Smithson's will, it has been
    engaged for over 150 years in the ``increase and diffusion of
    knowledge among men'' in accordance with the donor's
    instructions. For some years, it used only the funds made
    available by the trust. Then, before the turn of the century,
    it began to receive Federal appropriations to conduct some of
    its activities. With the expenditure of both private and
    Federal funds over the years, it has grown into one of the
    world's great scientific, cultural, and intellectual
    organizations. It operates magnificent museums, outstanding art
    galleries, and important research centers. Its collections are
    among the best in the world. Its traveling exhibits bring
    beauty and information throughout the country.
        It attracted approximately 30,000,000 visitors in 1998 to
    its museums, galleries, and zoological park. Additional
    millions also view Smithsonian traveling exhibitions, which
    appear across the United States and abroad, and the annual
    Folklife Festival. As custodian of the National Collections,
    the Smithsonian is responsible for more than 140 million art
    objects, natural history specimens, and artifacts. These
    collections are displayed for the enjoyment and education of
    visitors and are available for research by the staff of the
    Institution and by hundreds of visiting students, scientists,
    and historians each year. Other significant study efforts draw
    their data and results directly from terrestrial, marine, and
    astrophysical observations at various Smithsonian
    installations.
        The Smithsonian complex presently consists of 15 exhibition
    buildings in Washington, DC and New York City in the fields of
    science, history, technology and art; a zoological park in
    Washington, DC and an animal conservation and research center
    in Front Royal, Virginia; the Anacostia Museum, which performs
    research and exhibit activities in the District of Columbia; a
    preservation, storage and air and spacecraft display facility
    in Suitland, Maryland; a natural preserve in Panama and one on
    the Chesapeake Bay; an oceanographic research facility in Fort
    Pierce, Florida; astrophysical stations in Cambridge,
    Massachusetts and Mt. Hopkins, Arizona and elsewhere; and
    supporting administrative, laboratory, and storage areas.

                             salaries and expenses

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $347,154,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................       380,501,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................       371,501,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................       +24,347,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -9,000,000

        The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the
    budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

        The Committee recommends $371,501,000, an increase of
    $24,347,000 above the enacted level and a decrease of
    $9,000,000 below the fiscal year 2000 request. This amount
    provides the full $19,429,000 for fixed costs including
    mandatory pay increases, retirement system conversion, utility,
    communications, postage and rent increases as well as $919,000
    in costs associated with the Panama Canal Treaty
    implementation.
        The Committee accepts the reduction of $82,000 for non-
    recurring workers' compensation and $4,700,000 for fiscal year
    1999 emergency supplemental funding for the non-recurring Y2K
    compliant portions of the security system.
        The Committee has approved $5,000,000 for the National
    Museum of the American Indian collection's move but has
    disapproved $2,000,000 for the Dulles Center move, $5,000,000
    for Collections Information Access and $2,000,000 for Security
    System Modernization.
        The Committee believes that the $8,000,000 it provided over
    several years for planning and design of the Dulles facility
    fulfilled its financial commitment to the project. The
    Committee is supportive of the Collections Information Access
    program but was unable to provide additional funds because of
    the additional $26,000,000 provided for other Smithsonian
    needs. The Committee would consider a formal reprogramming
    request. The $2,000,000 request for the security system should
    be accommodated out of the increase provided in the Repair,
    Restoration and Alteration of Facilities account.
        The Committee is pleased that the National Museum of
    American History is moving forward to upgrade and modernize a
    number of its exhibits including the agriculture exhibit. The
    Committee hopes that, along with portraying the great
    technological advances made in agriculture, the new exhibit
    will illuminate the relationship between land, food, people and
    agriculture's role in achieving sustainable life systems in our
    fragile ecosystem.
        The Committee urges the Smithsonian Institution to assist
    the Washington Historical Society in the planning, development
    and use of displays, exhibits and programs of significance to
    the history of the City of Washington for the City Museum at
    the Carnegie Library in Washington, D.C.
        The Committee encourages the Presidio Trust and the
    Smithsonian Institution to establish an ``affiliation'' program
    at the Presidio of San Francisco that will enable Smithsonian
    exhibits, artifacts and programs to be made available to the
    public at that national park site.

         repair, restoration and alteration of facilities of buildings

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $40,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        47,900,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        47,900,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................        +7,900,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        The Committee recommends $47,900,000 for Repair,
    Restoration and Alteration of Facilities for fiscal year 2000,
    an increase of $7,900,000 from the enacted level and the same
    as the 2000 budget request. The Committee has consolidated
    funding for construction and improvements at the zoo in this
    account as proposed in the budget. The Committee continues to
    believe that addressing the backlog maintenance needs of the
    Institution is the highest priority. Bill language is included
    in this account to permit the transfer and merger of funds from
    the former ``Construction and Improvements, National Zoological
    Park'' account. Bill language also is included under
    Administrative Provisions which prohibits the use of funds to
    work on the Holt House.

                                  construction

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $16,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        19,000,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        19,000,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................        +3,000,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        The Committee recommends $19,000,000 for Construction, an
    increase of $3,000,000 above the enacted level and the same as
    the 2000 budget request. The amount completes the Federal
    construction responsibility for the American Museum of the
    American Indian Mall facility.

                            National Gallery of Art

        The National Gallery of Art is one of the world's great
    galleries. Its magnificent works of art are displayed for the
    benefit of millions of visitors from across this Nation and
    from other nations. The National Gallery of Art serves as an
    example of a successful cooperative endeavor between private
    individuals and institutions and the Federal Government. The
    many special exhibitions shown in the Gallery and then
    throughout the country bring great art treasures to Washington
    and the Nation. In 1999 the Gallery opened a sculpture garden,
    which provides a wonderful opportunity for the public to have
    an outdoor artistic experience in a lovely, contemplative
    setting.

                             salaries and expenses

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $57,938,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        61,438,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        61,538,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................        +3,600,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................          +100,000

        The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the
    budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

        The Committee recommends $61,538,000 for salaries and
    expenses of the National Gallery of Art. This amount is an
    increase of $100,000 above the budget request and $3,600,000
    above the fiscal year 1999 level. The increase above the budget
    request is to provide the necessary funds for the newly opened
    sculpture garden to remain open in the evening.

                repair, restoration and renovation of buildings

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................        $6,311,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................         6,311,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................         6,311,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        The Committee recommends $6,311,000 for repair, restoration
    and renovation of buildings at the National Gallery of Art.
    This amount is equal to both the budget request and the fiscal
    year 1999 level.
        The Committee expects the Gallery to work carefully with
    the Administration to address the requirements in the Gallery's
    long range facilities plan. To do so will require an increase
    in the restoration and renovation account in fiscal year 2001
    and in the outyears.

                 John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts

        The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts is a
    living memorial to the late President Kennedy and the National
    Center for the Performing Arts. The Center consists of over 1.5
    million square feet of usable floor space with visitation
    averaging 10,000 on a daily basis.

                           operations and maintenance

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $12,187,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        14,000,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        12,441,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................          +254,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -1,559,000

        The Committee recommends $12,441,000, an increase of
    $254,000 above the enacted level and a decrease of $1,559,000
    below the fiscal year 2000 request. The increase is provided
    for fixed costs.

                                  construction

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $20,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        20,000,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        20,000,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for construction, the
    same as the enacted level and the fiscal year 2000 request.

                Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars

                             salaries and expenses

        The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars is a
    unique institution with a special mission to serve as a living
    memorial to the late Woodrow Wilson. The Center performs this
    mandate through its role as an international institute for
    advanced study as well as a facilitator for discussions among
    scholars, public officials, journalists and business leaders
    from across the country on major long-term issues facing
    America and the world.

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................        $5,840,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................         6,040,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................         7,040,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................        +1,200,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................        +1,000,000

        The Committee recommends $7,040,000 for salaries and
    expenses, an increase of $1,200,000 above the enacted level and
    an increase of $1,000,000 above the budget request.
        The Committee is extremely pleased with the progress the
    Center has made under its new leadership in implementing the
    recommendations of the National Academy of Public
    Administration. Of particular importance is ensuring that the
    programs of the Center have relevance to current public policy
    issues and that the Center increase its public outreach
    programs.

               National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities

                        National Endowment for the Arts

                           grants and administration

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $83,500,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................       137,000,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        83,500,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................       -53,500,000

        The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with
    estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

        The Committee recommends $83,500,000 for grants and
    administration, which is equal to the 1999 level and
    $53,500,000 below the budget request.

                                matching grants

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $14,500,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        13,000,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        14,500,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................        +1,500,000

        The Committee recommends $14,500,000 for matching grants,
    which is equal to the 1999 level and $1,500,000 above the
    budget request.
        Bill language in Title III retains provisions in last
    year's bill regarding restrictions on individual grants,
    subgranting, and seasonal support (Sec. 317); authority to
    solicit and invest funds (Sec. 318); priority for rural and
    underserved communities, priority for grants that encourage
    public knowledge, education, understanding, and appreciation of
    the arts, designation of a category for grants of national
    significance, and a 15-percent cap on the total amount of grant
    funds directed to any one State (Sec. 320).

                     National Endowment for the Humanities

        The National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) was created
    in 1965 to encourage and support National progress in the
    humanities. The NEH provides, through a merit-based review
    process, grants in support of education, research, document and
    artifact preservation, and public service in the humanities.

                           grants and administration

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $96,800,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................       129,800,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        96,800,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................       -33,000,000

        The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the
    budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

        The Committee recommends $96,800,000 for grants and
    administration, which is equal to the 1999 level and
    $33,000,000 below the request.

                                matching grants

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $13,900,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        20,200,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        13,900,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -6,300,000

        The Committee recommends $13,900,000 for matching grants,
    equal to the 1999 funding level and $6,300,000 below the
    request.

                    Institute of Museum and Library Services

                           office of museum services

                           grants and administration

        The Institute for Museum and Library Services (IMLS) was
    created in the Museum and Library Services Act of 1996 (Public
    Law 104-208) which merged library services functions of the
    Department of Education into the Institute of Museum Services.
    These functions now come under the Office of Museum Services
    (OMS) portion of the IMLS. The OMS appropriation remains in the
    Interior and related agencies bill and the Office of Library
    Services appropriation remains in the Labor, Health and Human
    Services appropriations bill. The OMS provides operating
    support, conservation support and professional services to
    assist museums. General operating support is competitively
    awarded to assist museums with essential operating
    expenditures.

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $23,405,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        34,000,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        24,400,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................          +995,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -9,600,000

        The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the
    budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

        The Committee recommends $24,400,000 for the Office of
    Museum Services, which is $9,600,000 below the request and
    $995,000 above the 1999 level. The increases are intended to
    fund grants under the National Digital Library initiative as
    part of the national leadership grants. The Committee has also
    provided for fixed cost increases for program administration.

                            Commission of Fine Arts

        The Commission of Fine Arts was established in 1910 to meet
    the need for a permanent body to advise the government on
    matters pertaining to the arts, and particularly, to guide the
    architectural development of Washington, DC. Over the years the
    Commission's scope has been expanded to include advice on areas
    such as plans for parks, public buildings, location of National
    monuments and development of public squares. As a result, the
    Commission annually reviews approximately 500 projects. In
    fiscal year 1988 the Commission was given responsibility for
    the National Capital Arts and Cultural Affairs program.

                             salaries and expenses

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................          $898,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................         1,078,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................           935,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................           +37,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................          -143,000

        The Committee recommends $935,000 for the Commission of
    Fine Arts, which is $143,000 below the request and $37,000
    above the 1999 funding level. The Committee has provided fixed
    cost increases for program administration. The Committee
    directs that no appropriated funds be used to continue the
    Georgetown architecture project. The Committee has included
    bill language, as requested, giving the Commission of Fine Arts
    authority to charge, and use the resulting receipts without
    subsequent appropriation, for publications or services provided
    by the Commission. The Commission should provide the Committee
    with a report, as part of the normal budget justification
    process, indicating revenues generated by the Commission with
    the new authority and their proposed use.

                   National capital arts and cultural affairs

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................        $7,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................         6,000,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................         7,000,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................        +1,000,000

        The National Capital Arts and Cultural Affairs program was
    established in Public Law 99-190 to support artistic and
    cultural programs in the Nation's Capital. The Committee
    recommends $7,000,000 for this program, which is equal to the
    1999 level.

                   Advisory Council on Historic Preservation

                             salaries and expenses

        The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 established
    the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. The Advisory
    Council was reauthorized as part of the Omnibus Parks and
    Public Lands Management Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-333). The
    Council's mandate is to further the National policy of
    preserving historic and cultural resources for the benefit of
    present and future generations. The Council advises the
    President and Congress on preservation matters and provides
    consultation on historic properties threatened by Federal
    action.

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................        $2,800,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................         3,000,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................         3,000,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................          +200,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        The Committee recommends $3,000,000 for the Advisory
    Council on Historic Preservation, equal to the request and
    $200,000 above the 1999 level. The increased funding is to
    offset fixed cost increases.

                      National Capital Planning Commission

                             salaries and expenses

        The National Capital Planning Act of 1952 designated the
    National Capital Planning Commission as the central planning
    agency for the Federal government in the National Capital
    Region. The three major functions of the Commission are to
    prepare and adopt the Federal elements of the National Capital
    Comprehensive Plan, prepare an annual report on a five-year
    projection of the Federal Capital Improvement Program, and
    review plans and proposals submitted to the Commission.

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................        $5,954,000
    Emergency appropriation Year 2000 conversion..........           381,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................         6,312,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................         6,312,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999 (excluding emergency Year 2000
     conver-
          sion funds).....................................          +358,000
        Appropriation, 1999 (including Y2K conversion                -23,000
     funds)...............................................
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        The Committee recommends $6,312,000, which is equal to the
    budget request, $358,000 above the 1999 normal appropriation
    and $23,000 below the 1999 funding level including the one-time
    emergency appropriation for Year 2000 systems upgrades. The
    Committee recommendation offsets fixed cost increases. The
    Committee has included bill language as requested providing
    permanent authority for appointed members of the Commission to
    be compensated in a manner similar to that which was used the
    past several years. This payment schedule is widely used for
    similar boards and commissions in the Federal government.

                    United States Holocaust Memorial Council

                           holocaust memorial council

        In 1980 Congress passed legislation creating a 65 member
    Holocaust Memorial Council with the mandate to create and
    oversee a living memorial/museum to victims of holocausts. The
    museum opened in April 1993. Construction costs for the museum
    have come solely from donated funds raised by the U.S.
    Holocaust Memorial Museum Campaign and appropriated funds have
    been used for planning and development of programmatic
    components, overall administrative support and annual
    commemorative observances. Since the opening of the museum,
    appropriated funds have been provided to pay for the ongoing
    operating costs of the museum as authorized by Public Law 102-
    529.

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $35,007,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        33,786,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        33,286,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................        -1,721,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................          -500,000

        The Committee recommends $33,286,000 for fiscal year 2000,
    $1,721,000 below the enacted level and $500,000 below the
    fiscal year 2000 request.
        The $500,000 request was for the first phase of security
    enhancements at the Museum. The Committee provided the full
    amount totaling $2,000,000 in the Fiscal Year 1999
    Supplemental. The Committee has been very generous to the
    Museum, particularly in the area of security needs. It is the
    Committee's understanding that this completes security needs
    for the Museum.

                                 Presidio Trust

                              presidio trust fund

    Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $34,913,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.................................        44,400,000
    Recommended, 2000.....................................        44,400,000
    Comparison:
        Appropriation, 1999...............................        +9,487,000
        Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0

        The Committee recommends $44,400,000, an increase of
    $9,487,000 above the enacted level and the same as the budget
    request. This amount includes $20,000,000 in loan authority and
    $24,400,000 for operations.

                         TITLE III--GENERAL PROVISIONS

        Section 301 provides for public availability of information
    on consulting services contracts.
        Section 302 prohibits activities to promote public support
    or opposition to legislative proposals.
        Section 303 provides for annual appropriations unless
    expressly provided otherwise in this Act.
        Section 304 limits the use of personal cooks, chauffeurs or
    servants.
        Section 305 limits assessments against programs without
    Committee approval.
        Section 306 contains Buy American procedures and
    requirements.
        Section 307 limits the sale of giant sequoia trees by the
    Forest Service.
        Section 308 prohibits the use of funds by the National Park
    Service to enter into a contract requiring the removal of the
    underground lunchroom at Carlsbad Caverns NP, NM.
        Section 309 provides that no funds can be used for
    Americorps unless it is funded in the VA, HUD and Independent
    Agencies fiscal year 2000 appropriations, and makes use of such
    funds subject to reprogramming.
        Section 310 continues a limitation of funding relating to a
    pedestrian bridge between New Jersey and Ellis Island.
        Section 311 continues a limitation on accepting and
    processing applications for patents and on the patenting of
    Federal lands; permits processing of grandfathered
    applications; and permits third-party contractors to process
    grandfathered applications.
        Section 312 limits payments for contract support costs in
    past years to the funds available in law and accompanying
    report language in those years for the Bureau of Indian Affairs
    and the Indian Health Service.
        Section 313 limits Jobs in the Woods programs to timber
    dependent areas in Washington, Oregon, and northern California.
        Section 314 prohibits the use of recreational fees in
    excess of $500,000 for the construction of any permanent
    structure without advance Committee approval.
        Section 315 prohibits the use of funds for Biosphere
    Reserves as part of the Man and Biosphere Program.
        Section 316 prohibits the use of funds for posting clothing
    optional signs at Canaveral NS, FL.
        Section 317 contains reforms and limitations dealing with
    the National Endowment for the Arts.
        Section 318 permits the collection and use of private funds
    by the National Endowment for the Arts and the National
    Endowments for the Humanities.
        Section 319 limits the use of funds for new or revised
    National forest land management plans with certain exceptions.
        Section 320 continues direction to the National Endowment
    for the Arts on funding distribution.
        Section 321 prohibits the use of funds to support
    government-wide administrative functions unless they are
    justified in the budget process and approved by the House and
    Senate Appropriations Committees.
        Section 322 prohibits the use of funds for the National
    Telecommunications and Information Administration (Spectrum),
    GSA Telecommunication Centers, or the President's Council on
    Sustainable Development.
        Section 323 prohibits the use of funds to make improvements
    to Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House without
    Committee approval.
        Section 324 continues a provision, which permits the Forest
    Service to use the roads and trails fund for backlog
    maintenance and priority forest health treatments.
        Section 325 continues a provision prohibiting the use of
    funds to establish a national wildlife refuge in the Kankakee
    River watershed in northwestern Indiana and northeastern
    Illinois.
        Section 326 prevents funds available to the agencies and
    offices funded in this bill from being used to support the
    Council on Environmental Quality or other Executive Office of
    the President functions for purposes related to the American
    Heritage Rivers program. The Committee is concerned that scarce
    agency funds may be diverted to bureaucratic functions that
    should be supported by other appropriations acts if they have
    merit.
        Section 327 prohibits the use of answering machines during
    core business hours except in case of emergency. The American
    taxpayer deserves to receive personal attention from public
    servants.
        Section 328 includes language which authorizes the Forest
    Service to retain and expend administrative fees collected for
    Forest Service rights-of-way and permits collected pursuant to
    land use authorizations. The Committee held a hearing on
    February 10 evaluating various Forest Service land uses and the
    situation regarding cost recovery for administrative fees. At
    this hearing the Forest Service testified that they have
    authority to collect application processing fees and special
    use authorization monitoring fees, commonly called
    administrative fees, but they lack authority to retain and
    expend these fees. The Committee notes that there appears to be
    substantial shortfalls in permit administration. This causes,
    at times, inadequate service to public or commerical interests
    and, just as important, shortfalls at government oversight for
    activities occurring as special uses of Federal lands. The
    Committee expects that this language, which allows the agency
    to recover fees collected, will not only result in better
    service to the permitees, but also increase the protection of
    Federal lands, waters and investments. The Committee also
    expects that this will create an incentive system that will
    further enhance the future administration of special uses,
    thereby improving public service and long term protection of
    Federal lands and investments. Under the current system little
    cost recovery is occurring. The Committee expects the Forest
    Service to use these funds to improve its overall management
    efficiency with specific emphasis on customer service. The
    language further requires information be presented in the
    annual budget justification displaying purposes and amounts
    expended and estimated expenditures by purpose category for the
    coming fiscal year. The Committee will monitor closely the
    agency use of this authority and expect measurable improvements
    in performance if the new authority is to be retained. The
    Committee encourages the Forest Service to evaluate carefully
    fees charged to educational and public service, non-profit
    organizations so that these institutions which enhance public
    service and aided in their activities on NFS lands, consistent
    with the multiple-use mission of the Forest Service.
        Section 329 includes language regarding reports on the
    feasibility and cost of implementing the Interior Columbia
    Basin Ecosystem Management Project. The Committee remains
    concerned about this expensive effort. Previously, the Congress
    required the Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior through
    Public Law 105-83 to provide a report detailing specifically
    how the project would be implemented and the impact
    implementation would have on each unit of federal land. This
    section directs the Secretaries to prepare the report prior to
    publication of the final environmental impact statement (EIS),
    distribute the report for public comment for a minimum of 120
    days, and include detailed responses to the public comments in
    the final EIS.
        Section 330 provides authority for breastfeeding in the
    National Park Service, the Smithsonian, the John F. Kennedy
    Center, the Holocaust Memorial Museum and the National Gallery
    of Art.
        Section 331 prohibits the use of funds to propose or issue
    rules, regulations, decrees or orders for implementing the
    Kyoto Protocol prior to Senate ratification.

                                  Rescissions

        Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2), rule XIII of the House of
    Representatives, the following table is submitted describing
    the rescissions recommended in the accompanying bill:

                       rescission recommended in the bill

                                                                     Amounts
                                                             recommended for
            Department and activity                               rescission
    Department of the Interior: Land and Water Conservation
        Fund (contract authority)...........................     $30,000,000

                               Transfer of Funds

        Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2), rule XIII of the House of
    Representatives, the following table is submitted describing
    the transfer of funds provided in the accompanying bill.
        The table shows the appropriations affected by such
    transfers.

                                     APPROPRIATION TRANSFERS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Account to which transfer is to
       Account from which transfer is to be made        Amount                   be made                  Amount
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Department of Energy, Biomass Energy               $24,000,000  Department of Energy, Fossil         $24,000,000
     Development.                                                    Energy Research and Development.
    Department of Energy, Alternative Fuels              1,000,000  General Fund of the Treasury....       1,000,000
     Production.
    Department of Energy, Biomass Energy                25,000,000  Department of Energy, Energy          25,000,000
     Development.                                                    Conservation.
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     Changes in Application of Existing Law

        Pursuant to clause 3, rule XIII of the rules of the House
    of Representatives, the following Statements are submitted
    describing the effect of provisions in the accompanying bill
    which directly or indirectly change the application of existing
    law. In most instances these provisions have been included in
    prior appropriations Acts.
        The bill provides that certain appropriations items remain
    available until expended or extends the availability of funds
    beyond the fiscal year where programs or projects are
    continuing in nature under the provisions of authorizing
    legislation but for which that legislation does not
    specifically authorize such extended availability. Most of
    these items have been carried in previous appropriations Acts.
    This authority tends to result in savings by preventing the
    practice of committing funds at the end of the fiscal year.
        The bill includes, in certain instances, limitations on the
    obligation of funds for particular functions or programs. These
    limitations include restrictions on the obligation of funds for
    administrative expenses, travel expenses, the use of
    consultants, and programmatic areas within the overall
    jurisdiction of a particular agency.
        The Committee has included limitations for official
    entertainment or reception and representation expenses for
    selected agencies in the bill.
        Language is included in the various parts of the bill to
    continue ongoing activities of those Federal agencies, which
    require annual authorization or additional legislation which to
    date, has not been enacted.
        Language is included under Bureau of Land Management,
    Management of lands and resources, permitting the use of
    receipts from the Land and Water Conservation Act of 1965;
    providing funds to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation
    under certain conditions; permitting the use of fees from
    communication site rentals; and permitting the collection of
    fees for processing mining applications and for certain public
    land uses, and permitting the use of these fees for program
    operations.
        Language is included under Bureau of Land Management,
    Management of lands and resources, concerning applications for
    permits to drill for coalbed methane in the Powder River Basin.
        Language is included under Bureau of Land Management,
    Wildland fire management, to permit the use of funds from other
    accounts for firefighting; to permit the use of funds for
    lodging and subsistence of firefighters; and to permit the
    acceptance and use of funds for firefighting.
        Language is included under Bureau of Land Management,
    Central hazardous materials fund, providing that sums received
    from a party for remedial actions shall be credited to the
    account, and defining non-monetary payments.
        Language is included under Bureau of Land Management,
    Payments in lieu of taxes, to exclude any payment that is less
    than $100.
        Language is included under Bureau of Land Management,
    Forest ecosystems health and recovery fund permitting the use
    of salvage timber receipts.
        Language is included under Bureau of Land Management,
    Service charges, deposits, and forfeitures, to allow use of
    funds on any damaged public lands.
        Language is included under Bureau of Land Management,
    Administrative provisions, permitting the payment of rewards
    for information on violations of law on Bureau lands; and
    providing for cost-sharing arrangements for printing services.
        Language is included under United States Fish and Wildlife
    Service, Resource management, allowing for the maintenance of
    the herd of long-horned cattle on the Wichita Mountains
    Wildlife Refuge. Without this language, the long-horned cattle
    would have to be removed from the refuge. Language also is
    included, providing no year funding availability for the Lower
    Snake River Compensation Plan; providing for the Natural
    Communities Conservation Planning program and for a Youth
    Conservation Corps; limiting funding for certain Endangered
    Species Act listing program; permitting payment for information
    or rewards in the law enforcement program; permitting the use
    of fines from violations of the Marine Mammal Protection Act;
    earmarking funds for contaminant analysis; permitting the use
    of reimbursable funds provided by private entities; and
    allowing the use of Federal funds in advance of receipt of
    matching funds for certain State, local, or tribal
    partnerships.
        Language is included under United States Fish and Wildlife
    Service, Multinational species conservation fund, limiting
    administrative expenses to three percent of available funds.
        Language is included under United States Fish and Wildlife
    Service, Administrative provisions, providing for repair of
    damage to public roads; options for the purchase of land not to
    exceed $1; installation of certain recreation facilities; the
    maintenance and improvement of aquaria; the acceptance of
    donated aircraft; cost-shared arrangements for printing
    services. Language also is included to limit the use of funds
    for establishing new refuges.
        Language is included under National Park Service, Operation
    of the National Park System to allow road maintenance service
    to trucking permittees on a reimbursable basis. This provision
    has been included in annual appropriations Acts since 1954.
        Language is included under National Park Service, Operation
    of the National Park System, providing for a Youth Conservation
    Corps program; and providing for the use of funds in support of
    Everglades land acquisition.
        Language is included under National Park Service,
    Construction, prohibiting assessments by the Denver Service
    Center.
        Language is included under National Park Service, National
    recreation and preservation, limiting technical assistance for
    the Heritage Partnership Programs.
        Language is included under National Park Service, Historic
    preservation fund, permitting the use of fees from the historic
    preservation tax certification program; and striking the last
    sentence of section 403(a) of the National Historic
    Preservation Act of 1966.
        Language is included under National Park Service,
    Construction, permitting the use of fees for stabilization and
    rehabilitation at Ellis Island and making the use of fees
    contingent on a 50% cost share beginning in fiscal year 2001;
    and providing for upgrading the Mariposa County, CA municipal
    solid waste disposal system.
        Language is included under National Park Service, Land
    acquisition and State assistance, to permit the use of funds to
    assist the State of Florida with Everglades restoration; and
    making the use of funds for Everglades contingent on certain
    conditions.
        Language is included under National Park Service,
    Administrative provisions, requiring the inclusion of 18 U.S.C.
    1913 in the text of grant and contract documents; preventing
    the implementation of an agreement for the redevelopment of the
    southern end of Ellis Island limiting the use of funds for the
    United Nation's Biodiversity convention; and permitting the use
    of funds for workplace safety needs.
        Language is included under United States Geological Survey,
    Surveys, investigations and research, providing for two-year
    availability of funds for biological research and for the
    operations of cooperative research units; prohibiting the
    conduct of new surveys on private property without permission;
    and requiring cost sharing for cooperative topographic mapping
    and water resource data collection activities.
        Language is included under U.S. Geological Survey,
    Administrative provisions, permitting contracting for certain
    mapping and surveys; permitting construction of facilities;
    permitting payments to interstate compact negotiators; and
    permitting the hiring of temporary employees under certain
    conditions.
        Language is included under Minerals Management Service,
    Royalty and offshore minerals management, permitting the use of
    excess receipts from Outer Continental Shelf leasing
    activities; providing for reasonable expenses related to
    volunteer beach and marine clean-up activities; providing for
    refunds for overpayments on Indian allottee leases and
    providing for collecting royalties and late payment interest on
    amounts received in settlements associated with Federal and
    Indian leases.
        Language is included under Office of Surface Mining
    Reclamation and Enforcement, Regulation and Technology, to
    permit the use of moneys collected pursuant to assessment of
    civil penalties to reclaim lands affected by coal mining after
    August 3, 1977; and to permit payment to State and tribal
    personnel for travel and per diem expenses for training.
        Language is included under Office of Surface Mining
    Reclamation and Enforcement, Abandoned mine reclamation fund,
    to limit amounts in the account for acid mine drainage
    activities and for emergency reclamation projects to allow use
    of debt recovery to pay for debt collection; and to allow
    States to use appropriated funds for non-Federal cost sharing
    for acid mine drainage abatement.
        Language also is included to provide a grant to the
    Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for the purpose of conducting a
    demonstration project to determine the efficacy of improving
    water quality by removing metals from waters polluted by acid
    drainage and to allow the State of Maryland to set aside funds
    for acid mine abatement.
        Language is included under Bureau of Indian Affairs,
    Operation of Indian programs, to limit funds for contract
    support costs and for administrative cost grants for schools;
    to permit advance payments to Indian schools and business
    enterprises; and to permit the use of tribal priority
    allocations for general assistance payments to individuals, for
    contract support costs, and for repair and replacement of
    schools.
        Language is included under Bureau of Indian Affairs,
    Operation of Indian programs, allowing reprogramming of Self-
    Governance funds, allowing changes to certain eligibility
    criteria by tribal governments, allowing the transfer of
    certain forestry funds, providing for an Indian self-
    determination fund.
        Language is included under Bureau of Indian Affairs,
    Construction, providing that 6 percent of Federal Highway Trust
    Fund contract authority may be used for management costs;
    providing for the transfer of Navajo irrigation project funds
    to the Bureau of Reclamation; providing Safety of Dams funds on
    a non-reimbursable basis; requiring conformance with building
    codes and health and safety standards; specifying the procedure
    for dispute resolution; and permitting the use of certain
    overpayments for school construction.
        Language is included under Bureau of Indian Affairs,
    Administrative provisions, to prohibit funding of Alaska
    schools; to limit the number of schools and the expansion of
    grade levels in individual schools; to limit the use of funds
    for contracts, grants and cooperative agreements and permitting
    tribes to return funds without diminishing government-to-
    government relationships.
        Language is included under Departmental Offices, Insular
    Affairs, Assistance to Territories, requiring audits of the
    financial transactions of the Territorial governments by the
    General Accounting Office; providing grant funding under
    certain terms of the Agreement of the Special Representatives
    on Future United States Financial Assistance for the Northern
    Mariana Islands; deferring some of the capital improvement
    funding for the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands
    from fiscal year 2000 to fiscal year 2003; providing an
    additional payment to Guam for compact impact assistance;
    providing a grant to the Close-Up foundation; and allowing
    appropriations for disaster assistance to be used as non-
    Federal matching funds for hazard mitigation grants provided
    pursuant to other law.
        Language is included under Departmental Offices,
    Departmental management, salaries and expenses, permitting
    payments to former Bureau of Mines workers.
        Language is included under Departmental Offices, Office of
    Special Trustee for American Indians, specifying that the
    statute of limitations shall not commence on any claim
    resulting from trust funds losses; and exempting quarterly
    statements for accounts less than $1.
        Language is included under Departmental Offices, Indian
    land consolidation pilot, permitting a reservation-wide system
    for establishing fair market values; limiting acquisition to
    situations where there is owner consent; and making sale
    proceeds available for appropriation.
        Language is included under Departmental Offices,
    Administrative provisions, prohibiting the use of working
    capital or consolidated working funds to augment certain
    offices; allowing the sale of existing aircraft with proceeds
    used to offset the purchase price of replacement aircraft; and
    exempting the Office of Special Trustee for American Indians
    from issuing checks less than $1.
        Language is included under General provisions, Department
    of the Interior, to allow transfer of funds in certain
    emergency situations and requiring replacement with a
    supplemental appropriation request; and designating certain
    transferred funds as ``emergency requirements'' under the
    Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
        Language is included under General provisions, Department
    of the Interior, to permit the Department to consolidate
    services and receive reimbursement for said services. Language
    also is included providing for uniform allowances.
        Language is included under General provisions, Department
    of the Interior, to allow for obligations in connection with
    contracts issued for services or rentals for periods not in
    excess of 12 months beginning at any time during the fiscal
    year.
        Language is included under General Provisions, Department
    of the Interior, restricting various oil and gas preleasing,
    leasing, exploration and drilling activities within the Outer
    Continental Shelf in the Georges Bank-North Atlantic planning
    area, Mid-Atlantic and South Atlantic planning area, Eastern
    Gulf of Mexico planning area, North Aleutian Basin planning
    area, Northern, Southern and Central California planning areas,
    and Washington/Oregon planning area.
        Language is included under General provisions, Department
    of the Interior, limiting the investment of Federal funds by
    Indian tribes.
        Language is included under General provisions, Department
    of the Interior, providing for expanded employee benefits to
    compensate for the closure of the helium program through fiscal
    year 2002.
        Language is included under General Provisions, Department
    of the Interior, to limit the use of funds for contract support
    costs; to prohibit fee exemptions for non-local traffic through
    National Parks; to permit the leasing of space in the Interior
    South Building; and to change the name of the Steel Industry
    American Heritage Area to the ``Rivers of Steel National
    Heritage Area''.
        Language is included under General Provisions, Department
    of the Interior, allowing the use of rebates from credit cards;
    permitting the use of unobligated balances for trust reform
    efforts; exempting the Fort Baker, Golden Gate National
    Recreation Area from taxes and assessments and permitting
    certain lease arrangements at Fort Baker; requiring grazing
    permit renewals at Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area;
    allowing grazing permit renewals by the Bureau of Land
    Management under certain conditions; and providing for
    administrative law judges to handle Indian issues.
        Language is included under Forest Service, national forest
    system, allowing administrative funds to be used for expenses
    associated with the management of funds provided under other
    Forest service appropriation accounts; allowing 50 percent of
    the funds collected under the Land and Water Conservation Fund
    Act to be expended; and requiring the fiscal year 2001 budget
    justification to display unobligated balances available at the
    start of fiscal year 2000.
        Language is included under Forest Service, Wildland fire
    management, allowing the use of funds to repay advances from
    other accounts and requiring 50 percent of any unobligated
    balances remaining at the end of fiscal year 1999, excepting
    hazardous fuels funding, to be transferred to the Knutson-
    Vandenberg fund as repayment for past advances; and providing
    for a grant for the Joint Fire Science program.
        Language is included under Forest Service, Reconstruction
    and maintenance, allowing funds to be used for road
    decommissioning; requiring that no road decommissioning be
    funded until notice and an opportunity for public comment has
    been provided; and merging unobligated balances from the
    national forest system account for facility and trail
    maintenance and unobligated balances from the reconstruction
    and construction account with the new reconstruction and
    maintenance account.
        Language is included under Forest Service, Land
    acquisition, making funds available from the Land and Water
    Conservation Fund for administrative expenses and for
    acquisition; and, subject to valid existing rights, withdrawing
    from mineral entry or disposal all Federally owned lands and
    interests in lands within the New World Mining District, MT.
        Language is included under Forest Service, Range Betterment
    Fund, to provide that 6 percent of the funds may be used for
    administrative expenses.
        Language is included under Forest Service, Administrative
    provisions, to provide that proceeds from the sale of aircraft
    may be used to purchase replacement aircraft; limiting the
    availability of funds to change the boundaries of or abolish
    any region or to move or close any regional office or provide
    for reorganization. Language is also provided to allow any
    funds available to the Secretary of Agriculture to be used for
    advances for firefighting and emergency rehabilitation of
    damaged lands if and only if all previously appropriated
    emergency contingent wildfire funds have been released by the
    President and apportioned; to allow funds to be used through
    the Agency for International Development and the Foreign
    Agricultural Service for work in foreign countries, and to
    support forestry activities outside of the United States.
        Language is included under Forest Service, Administrative
    provisions, to prohibit the following without the advance
    approval of the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations:
    (1) the transfer of funds under the Department of Agriculture
    transfer authority; (2) reprogramming of funds; and (3)
    transfer of funds to the working capital fund of the Department
    of Agriculture.
        Language is included under Forest Service, Administrative
    provisions, to provide for a Youth Conservation Corps program;
    allowing funds to be used for representation expenses by the
    Chief; providing for matching funds and administrative expenses
    for the National Forest Foundation and also matching funds for
    the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation; providing funds to
    be available for sustainable rural development; permitting the
    transfer of certain funds to the State of Washington fish and
    wildlife department for planned projects; providing that funds
    shall be available for payment to counties within the Columbia
    River Gorge National Scenic Area pursuant to Public Law 99-663,
    providing authority to the Pinchot Institute for activities at
    Grey Towers National Historic Landmark; allowing payments to
    Del Norte County, CA pursuant to Public Law 101-612; limiting
    employee details; and permitting limited reimbursements to the
    Office of General Counsel in USDA.
        Language is included under Department of Energy, Fossil
    energy research and development, limiting the field testing of
    nuclear explosives for the recovery of oil and gas; providing
    for activities at the Albany Research Center, OR; and requiring
    the transfer of funds from the Biomass Energy Development
    account.
        Language is included under Department of Energy, Naval
    Petroleum and oil shale reserves waiving sales requirements
    based on Strategic Petroleum Reserve oil purchases; and
    permitting the use of unobligated balances.
        Language is included under Department of Energy,
    Alternative fuels production, transferring receipts to the
    General Fund in the Treasury Department.
        Language is included under Department of Energy, Energy
    conservation, providing allocations of grants to State and
    local programs; requiring a 25 percent State cost share for the
    weatherization assistance program; and requiring the transfer
    of funds from the Biomass Energy Development account.
        Language is included under Administrative provisions,
    Department of Energy, providing for vehicle and guard services
    and uniform allowances; limiting programs of price supports and
    loan guarantees to what is provided in appropriations Acts;
    providing for the transfer of funds to other agencies of the
    Government; providing for retention of revenues by the
    Secretary of Energy on certain projects; requiring certain
    contracts be submitted to Congress prior to implementation;
    prohibiting issuance of procurement documents without
    appropriations; permitting the use of contributions and fees
    for cooperative projects; and permitting transfer of funds for
    Strategic Petroleum Reserve drawdown and requiring the
    repayment of such transferred funds.
        Language is included under Indian Health Service, Indian
    health services, providing that certain contracts and grants
    may be performed in two fiscal years; exempting certain tribal
    funding from fiscal year constraints; limiting funds for
    catastrophic care, loan repayment and certain new contracts;
    capping contract support cost spending and requiring a pro-rata
    distribution for new contracts; and providing for use of
    collections under Title IV of the Indian Health Care
    Improvement Act.
        Language is included under Indian Health Service, Indian
    health facilities, providing that funds may be used to purchase
    land, modular buildings and trailers.
        Language is included under Indian Health Service,
    Administrative provisions, providing for payments for telephone
    service in private residences in the field, purchase of
    reprints, and purchase and erection of portable buildings; and
    allowing deobligation and reobligation of funds applied to
    self-governance funding agreements.
        Language is included under Indian Health Service,
    Administrative provisions, providing that health care may be
    extended to non-Indians at Indian Health Service facilities;
    and providing for expenditure of funds transferred to IHS from
    the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
        Language is included under Indian Health Service,
    Administrative provisions, to prevent the Indian Health Service
    from billing Indians in order to collect from third-party
    payers until Congress has agreed to implement a specific
    policy; and to require a proportional distribution of contract
    support costs.
        Language is included under Indian Health Service,
    Administrative provisions, allowing payment of expenses for
    meeting attendance; specifying that certain funds shall not be
    subject to certain travel limitations; prohibiting the
    expenditure of funds to implement new eligibility regulations;
    providing that funds be apportioned only in the appropriation
    structure in this Act; and prohibiting changing the
    appropriations structure without approval of the Appropriations
    Committees.
        Language is included under Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian
    Relocation, salaries and expenses, defining eligible
    relocatees; prohibiting movement of any single Navajo or Navajo
    family unless a new or replacement home is available; limiting
    relocatees to one new or replacement home; and establishing a
    priority for relocation of Navajos to those certified eligible
    who have selected and received homesites on the Navajo
    reservation or selected a replacement residence off the Navajo
    reservation.
        Language is included under Smithsonian Institution,
    Salaries and expenses, to allow for advance payments to
    independent contractors performing research services or
    participating in official Smithsonian presentations; providing
    that funds may be used to support American overseas research
    centers; and permitting the use of certain funds for the Victor
    Building.
        Language is included under Smithsonian Institution, Repair
    and restoration of buildings, to permit the Smithsonian
    Institution to select contractors for certain purposes on the
    basis of contractor qualifications as well as price; and
    permitting the merger of funds previously appropriated to zoo
    construction.
        Language is included under Administrative Provisions,
    Smithsonian Institution, to limit planning, design or expansion
    of facilities without Committee approval; and to limit the use
    of funds for the Holt House at the zoo; and limiting funds for
    construction of the National Museum of the American Indian.
        Language is included under National Gallery of Art,
    Salaries and expenses, for payment in advance for membership in
    library, museum, and art associations or societies; for
    restoration and repair of works of art by contract without
    advertising; and providing no-year availability of funds for
    special exhibitions.
        Language is included under National Gallery of Art, Repair,
    restoration and renovation of buildings, to perform work by
    contract or otherwise and to select contractors for certain
    purposes on the basis of contractor qualifications as well as
    price.
        Language is included under National Foundation on the Arts
    and the Humanities, Matching grants (for both the NEA and NEH),
    to allow for the obligation of current and prior year funds of
    gifts, bequests, and devises of money for which equal amounts
    have not previously been appropriated.
        Language is included under National Foundation on the Arts
    and the Humanities, Administrative provisions, limiting the use
    of funds for reception expenses.
        Language is included under Commission of Fine Arts,
    Salaries and expenses, permitting the charging and use of fees
    for its publications.
        Language is included under Advisory Council on Historic
    Preservation to restrict hiring anyone at Executive Level V or
    higher positions.
        Language is included under National Capital Planning
    Commission, salaries and expenses, to provide for a pay level
    at the rate of Executive Level IV for all appointed members.
        Language is included under Holocaust Memorial Council,
    providing no year funding availability for repair programs and
    museums exhibitions.
        Language is included under Presidio Trust Fund requiring
    that guaranteed loans be consistent with the Congressional
    Budget Act of 1974.
        Language is included under Title III--General provisions to
    prohibit the use of funds to distribute literature either to
    promote or oppose legislative proposals on which Congressional
    action is incomplete.
        Language is included under Title III--General provisions,
    to prohibit the use of funds to provide personal cooks,
    chauffeurs or other personal servants to any office or
    employee; to limit use of consulting services; to specify that
    funds are for one year unless provided otherwise.
        Language is included under Title III--General provisions,
    prohibiting assessments against programs funded in this bill;
    and providing Buy American requirements.
        Language is included under Title III--General provisions,
    prohibiting the sale of giant sequoia trees in a manner
    different from 1995.
        Language is included under Title III--General provisions,
    prohibiting the use of funds by the National Park Service to
    enter into a concession contract requiring the removal of the
    underground lunchroom at Carlsbad Caverns NP.
        Language is included under Title III--General provisions,
    limiting use of funds for the AmeriCorps program; and limiting
    use of funds relating to a bridge between New Jersey and Ellis
    Island.
        Language is included under Title III--General provisions,
    continuing a limitation on accepting and processing
    applications for patents and on the patenting of Federal lands;
    permitting processing of grandfathered applications; and
    permitting third-party contractors to process grandfathered
    applications.
        Language is included under Title III--General provisions,
    limiting the use of funds for contract support costs on Indian
    contracts.
        Language is included under Title III--General provisions,
    to permit limiting competition under the Jobs in the Woods
    program; requiring Committee approval prior to using
    recreational fees for constructing certain permanent buildings;
    limiting funds for nomina-

    tions for Biosphere programs of the United Nations; limiting
    funds for posting clothing optional signs at Cape Canaveral NS;
    making reforms in the National Endowment for the Arts,
    including funding distribution reforms; permitting the National
    Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities to collect, invest
    and use private donations; limiting the use of funds for forest
    land management plans until regulations have been published;
    limiting funds for improvements to Pennsylvania Avenue in front
    of the White House without Committee approval; providing
    additional authority to the Secretary of Agriculture to use the
    ten percent roads and trails fund for additional purposes;
    limiting the use of funds for any government-wide
    administrative functions and, specifically for Spectrum, GSA
    telecommunications centers, and the President's Council on
    Sustainable Development; prohibiting the establishment of a
    Kankakee National Wildlife Refuge in IL and IN; prohibiting the
    use of funds for certain administrative functions of the
    American Heritage Rivers program; providing authority for
    breastfeeding at certain locations; and limiting the use of
    funds relating to the Kyoto Protocol.

                      Appropriations Not Authorized by Law

        Pursuant to clause 3 of rule XIII of the House of
    Representatives, the following table lists the appropriations
    in the accompanying bill which, in whole or in part, are not
    authorized by law:

    Department of the Interior:

    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Resource Management
    National Park Service, National Recreation and Preservation

    Department of Energy:

    Fossil Energy Research and Development
    Energy Conservation
    Economic Regulation
    Strategic Petroleum Reserve
    Energy Information Administration

    Other Related Agencies:

    National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities:
        National Endowment for the Arts
        National Endowment for the Humanities
        The Committee notes that authorizing legislation for many
    of these programs is in various stages of the legislative
    process and these authorizations are expected to be enacted
    into law later this year.

                      Compliance With Rule XIII--Clause 3

        In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of
    the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
    the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
    proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
    matter is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is
    proposed is shown in roman):
        Section 403(a) of the National Historic Preservation is
    amended as follows:
        (a) There is hereby established within the Department of
    the Interior a National Center for Preservation Technology and
    Training. [The Center shall be located at Northwestern State
    University of Louisiana in Natchitoches, Louisiana.]
        Section 4, subsections (b) and (c) of Public Law 94-241, as
    amended by Public Law 104-140, is further amended as follows:
        (b) Upon the expiration of the period of Federal financial
    assistance which is provided to the Government of Northern
    Mariana Islands pursuant to section 1803 of this title,
    payments of direct grant assistance shall continue at the
    annual level provided for the last fiscal year of the
    additional period of seven fiscal years expect that, for fiscal
    years 1996 through [2002] 1999, payments to the Commonwealth of
    the Northern Mariana Islands pursuant to the multi-year funding
    agreements contemplated under the Covenant shall be $11,000,000
    annually[,] and for fiscal year 2000, payments to the
    Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands shall be
    $6,000,000, but shall return to the level of $11,000,000
    annually for fiscal years 2001 and 2002. In fiscal year 2003,
    the payment to the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands
    shall be $5,000,000. Such payments shall be subject to an equal
    local match and all other requirements set forth in the
    Agreement of the Special Representatives on Future Federal
    Financial Assistance of the Northern Mariana Islands, executed
    on December 17, 1992 between the special representative of the
    President of the United States and special representatives of
    the Governor of the Northern Mariana Islands with any
    additional amounts otherwise made available under this section
    in any fiscal year and not required to meet the schedule of
    payments in this subsection to be provided as set forth in
    subsection (c) until Congress otherwise provides by law.
        (c) The additional amounts referred to in subsection (b)
    shall be made available to the Secretary for obligation as
    follows:
              (1) for fiscal years 1996 through 2001, $4,580,000
            annually for capital infrastructure projects as Impact
            Aid for Guam under section 104(c)(6) of Public Law 99-
            239;
              (2) for fiscal year 1996, $7,700,000 shall be
            provided for capital infrastructure projects in
            American Samoa; $4,420,000 for resettlement of Rongelap
            Atoll; [and]
              (3) for fiscal years 1997 and thereafter, all such
            amounts shall be available solely for capital
            infrastructure projects in Guam, the Virgin Islands,
            American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern
            Mariana Islands, the Republic of Palau, the Federated
            States of Micronesia and the Republic of the Marshall
            Islands: Provided, That in fiscal year 1997, $3,000,000
            of such amounts shall be made available to the College
            of the Northern Marianas and beginning in fiscal year
            1997, and in each year thereafter, not to exceed
            $3,000,000 may be allocated, as provided in
            appropriations Acts, to the Secretary of the Interior
            for use by Federal agencies or the Commonwealth of the
            Northern Mariana Islands to address immigration, labor,
            and law enforcement issues in the Northern Mariana
            Islands. The specific projects to be funded in American
            Samoa shall be set forth in a five-year plan for
            infrastructure assistance developed by the Secretary of
            the Interior in consultation with the American Samoa
            Government and updated annually and submitted to the
            Congress concurrent with the budget justifications for
            the Department of the Interior. In developing budget
            recommendations for capital infrastructure funding, the
            Secretary shall indicate the highest priority projects,
            consider the extent to which particular projects are
            part of an overall master plan, whether such project
            has been reviewed by the Corps of Engineers and any
            recommendations made as a result of such review, the
            extent to which a set-aside for maintenance would
            enhance the life of the project, the degree to which a
            local cost-share requirement would be consistent with
            local economic and fiscal capabilities, and may propose
            an incremental set-aside, not to exceed $2,000,000 per
            year, to remain available without fiscal year
            limitation, as an emergency fund in the event of
            natural or other disasters to supplement other
            assistance in the repair, replacement, or hardening of
            essential facilities: Provided further, That the
            cumulative amount set aside for such emergency fund may
            not exceed $10,000,000 at any time[.]; and
              (4) for fiscal year 2000, $5,000,000 shall be
            provided to Guam.

                        Five-Year Projection of Outlays

        In compliance with section 308(a)(1)(B) of the
    Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as
    amended, the following table contains five-year projections
    associated with the budget authority provided in the
    accompanying bill:

                                  [In millions]

    Budget authority......................................           $14,057
    Outlays:
        Fiscal year 2000..................................             9,302
        Fiscal year 2001..................................             3,788
        Fiscal year 2002..................................               785
        Fiscal year 2003..................................               294
        Fiscal year 2004 and future years.................                49

                   Assistance to State and Local Governments

        In accordance with section 308(a)(1)(C) of the
    Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as
    amended, the financial assistance to State and local
    governments is as follows:

                                  [In millions]

    New budget authority..................................            $1,016
    Fiscal year 2000 outlays resulting therefrom..........               531

                              Full Committee Votes

        Pursuant to the provisions of clause 3(b) of rule XIII of
    the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call
    vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with
    the names of those voting for and those voting against, are
    printed below:
        There were no recorded votes.

                                Additional Views

        The major problem with this year's Interior and Related
    Agencies Appropriations Bill is not what it does--it is what it
    does not do. The penurious budget allocation provided the
    subcommittee, while a vast improvement over the earlier target
    of only $11.3 billion, simply does not allow this bill to
    address adequately the myriad needs facing our nation's
    historical, cultural and geographical treasures.
        The greatest shortfall occurs in the Administration's Lands
    Legacy Initiative. The President's budget requested the full
    authorization of $900 million for the land and water
    conservation fund for fiscal year 2000, including $795 million
    in the Interior Bill. Unfortunately, the bill reported from
    committee includes only $165 million, or 20 percent, of the
    budget request. That amount is less than one-half of the
    funding made available for land and water conservation projects
    in 1999. The result of this inadequate funding will be missed
    opportunities with the likely outcome of increased development
    and commercialization in and near some of our nation's most
    spectacular public places. According to the Department of the
    Interior, there is a land acquisition backlog of more than $5
    billion for 4.5 million acres located within boundaries of
    park, refuge and recreation units. At 1998 land prices,
    allowing nothing for inflation, the existing backlog would take
    more than 30 years to purchase. There apparently are some
    Members of Congress who believe the federal government owns too
    much real estate already. However, there is a large and growing
    segment of the public that realizes how fragile and important
    our national parks, refuges, and forests are, and is willing to
    spend tax dollars to protect and preserve these holdings.
        The land acquisition backlog does not begin to address the
    totality of unfunded needs facing the bureaus and agencies
    included in the Interior Appropriations Bill. The Department of
    the Interior estimates its deferred maintenance backlog to be
    up to $15 billion. The Forest Service estimates it would need
    $8 billion to satisfy its current maintenance backlog. If
    deferred capital improvements are included, the amount of the
    Forest Services total unmet needs nearly doubles. According to
    a needs-based budget developed by the tribes, the Indian Health
    Service should request $8 billion for services and facilities
    instead of the $2.4 billion contained in this bill. And the
    unmet needs exist not only for the larger agencies funded in
    this bill. The Smithsonian Institution estimates it currently
    needs at least $250 million and probably more to bring some of
    its aging museums and facilities up to code. The Kennedy Center
    estimates its maintenance and repair requirement will be $30
    million and its capital renewal program will require $150
    million over the next few years.
        While the Committee's bill adequately funds the
    uncontrollable and inflationary costs of most of the agencies,
    the overall allocation barely allows agencies to keep even with
    their maintenance backlogs, much less try to reduce them. As
    every homeowner knows only too well, delaying repairs for
    whatever reason almost always mean the repairs cost more and
    are more extensive when finally done. If the funding levels
    assumed under the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 are adhered to
    for fiscal years 2001 and 2002, the backlog of unmet needs for
    agencies in the Interior and Related Agencies Bill undoubtedly
    will increase significantly. An important point to remember is
    that most of the maintenance backlog and unmet needs estimates
    do not assume increased demands on facilities, parks and
    forests. Annual visitation figures for national parks, forests,
    refuges and other facilities have been increasing dramatically
    in recent years. Many press accounts tell about how we, as a
    people, are ``loving our parks to death.'' Annual visits to
    units in the National Park System are approaching 300 million.
    A little known fact is that visits to our National Forests
    exceed those to our National Parks. In the next few decades,
    considerable infrastructure and construction costs will be
    necessary to equip and prepare our parks and forests for the
    increasing crush of visitors. The status quo budgets of the
    past few years and those assumed in the future do little to
    prepare our national treasures for future demands they are
    likely to experience.
        Another area where the Committee's bill falls far short of
    desired funding is for the National Foundation on the Arts and
    the Humanities. Total recommended funding for the National
    Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the
    Humanities is only $208.7 million, a 30 percent reduction from
    the requested level of $150 million for each Endowment. The
    Administration's budget this year includes a new initiative for
    the NEA called Challenge America, which had elements
    specifically targeted to increasing access to the arts and to
    making youth at risk more aware of the arts. The effects of the
    shortsightedness of underfunding the NEA and NEH for yet
    another year will reverberate throughout our society for a long
    time.
        In summary, the funding recommendations contained in this
    bill will do much for our nation and its cultural, physical and
    historical heritage. But when compared to the outstanding needs
    that cry out to be addressed, they fall far short of the mark.

                                                            David Obey.