House Report 106-222 - DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2000

[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.